
Written by William C. Duncan
December 9, 2020
The index is a national survey of 1,000 respondents reflecting a nationally representative sample. The survey includes core questions that are repeated year after year to track changes and, this year, some additional questions related to the specific conditions of the COVID pandemic.
Some of the findings of the index are very relevant for this COVID year.
For instance: “More than 60 percent of respondents said that faith or religion was important to them during the pandemic.” On this point, the survey disclosed a surprising and encouraging note about younger respondents. The report shows that response varied by age: “Respondents older than 65, who across polls tend to be more religious and more at risk during the pandemic, were much more likely than the total sample to say that faith and religion were extremely or very important to dealing with the pandemic.”
Interestingly, though, “Gen Z respondents, who across polls tend to be less religious and least at risk during the pandemic, were also much more likely than the average to say faith and religion had been extremely or very important.” 74% said it was at least somewhat important while 51% said it was extremely or very important.
Related to this, there was a 7% increase since 2019 in the percentage of Americans who believed “people of faith are definitely part of the solution” to the problems facing the country. That answer was given by 62% of respondents.
A specific COVID-related question related to the priority for reopening businesses versus houses of worship. 57% of respondents believed that the priority for reopening businesses and churches are the same. An additional 13% said opening churches is a much higher priority and 9% said that the priority should be somewhat higher.
On the foundational question of how religious freedom should be protected, 60% “agree that religion for some people is a fundamental part of ‘who I am’ and should be protected accordingly.” A majority “agreed with the statements that religious freedom is inherently public and that religious exercise extends to school, work, social media, and other public places” with the former statement garnering particularly strong support from “Gen Z and Black respondents.”
Important question, of course, is how that protection should be provided. Here too the responses were Illuminating.
Respondents appeared to overwhelmingly recognize the importance of religious freedom protections. The index reports that “when it came to voting decisions, a candidate’s stance on religious freedom was an important factor to 78 percent of voters.”
Despite the importance of the issue to voters, though, the survey respondents expressed little confidence in the performance of elected officials in actually protecting religious freedom. In response to the question of “which branch of government does the best job of protecting religious freedom,” the respondents were most likely to point to unelected officials: the courts (27%), then “other” (21%). An elected official, the president, is only mentioned third (19%), followed by state governments (18%), and Congress is cited last (15%).
This survey is an important guide for policymakers. Americans see religion as a critical part of individual identity deserving of protection at the very least equal treatment with other elements of society, but they don’t look to elected officials to provide that protection.
With the pandemic bringing younger Americans around to the personal and social value of religion along with their older counterparts, that is something to work on.
Read More
Working paper on history of parent-driven education points toward reforms
Parents and policymakers alike may find the paper useful in understanding education policy, where we are likely headed, and what we should do next.
Will AI kill us in 10 years? | Chris Koopman & Ford Copple
Is AI really on track to destroy humanity, or are we confusing small risks with science fiction? On this episode of Defending Ideas, Nic Dunn sits down with Chris Koopman, CEO of Abundance Institute, and Ford Copple, tech policy analyst at Sutherland Institute, to discuss the growing debate over AI safety, regulation, data centers, and technological innovation.
Massachusetts case raises concerns about government cutting parents out of children’s decisions
When parents pose a threat to children’s safety, the state should act. But ideological disagreements are not a reason to cut parents out of a child’s life.

