• As we come to the end of a contentious election season, many wonder what could lead to less division, and some research suggests that religious faith may be a part of tempering partisanship.
• Recent research, consistent with other studies, suggests that although people of faith are involved in their communities and civic affairs, they do not see religion as a setting for divisive political discussions.
• This, along with other contributions of religious organizations and people of faith, deserves to be highlighted in a formal way to increase understanding, particularly since a growing proportion of Americans do not see themselves as religious.

It is not a secret that our recently concluded election season was extremely contentious. During the campaign, vice presidential candidate JD Vance even thought it was necessary to say that people should not cut off family members or friends because of political disagreements. Many people wonder what we can do to remove some of the venom from these contests. A recent study may point to one productive route.

A news report on the study explains that researchers asked about the intersection of religion and politics. People of all faiths said they did not “want politics associated with their religion.” A researcher pointed out that “people trust religion more than any other institution,” so it could be an antidote to the division associated with partisan contests. Researchers found that people of faith, though they were civically involved, did not believe that religion was the appropriate setting for political discussions.

This finding is consistent with other research highlighted in Sutherland Institute’s recent report Faith and the Climate of Freedom, which describes some of the social benefits of religion.

That report points to research finding that “[c]onservatives’ views of black people, Hispanics, and Asians improve the more frequently conservatives attend religious services” and “[f]requent conservative churchgoers also say they care more about racial equality.” Additionally, “nonreligious white Trump voters are about three times as likely as churchgoing white Trump voters to say their white racial identity is ‘extremely important’ to them (26 percent vs. 9 percent).”

This is an area that deserves more scholarly attention. But there are additional hints that religion can have a moderating effect on potential political vision. Two nonprofit leaders in South Africa, for instance, noted: “Religion continues to be a unifying social force in South Africa, that cuts across race, ethnicity, gender, nationality, and socio-economic status.”

A Gallup pollster pointed to religion’s “positive functions in society, including … its contribution to social cohesion and solidarity.”

These contributions, another study found, may be dependent on “the content and practices of faith” and that “a loving image of God and service attendance are positively related to social cohesion.”

This is not to say that religious people will not be contentious or prejudiced. In fact, major religions teach that all people are susceptible to base motives and actions. They also believe, however, that all people are accountable to God or a higher power for their actions, including in relation to others who are different than they are. This belief becomes the source for unifying actions and beliefs.

The potential to temper partisan vitriol is only one of many contributions that people of faith and religious organizations make. It would be well to highlight those contributions to create better understanding and encourage appreciation, particularly as more Americans are not affiliated with a religious faith and may be unaware of the experiences of those who are.

Many states designate certain days to highlight important issues and contributions. As with Constitution Day, these commemorations can be the occasion for discussions and educational efforts. America could use such a day to highlight the many social benefits of religion.