About six-in-ten Americans (62%) have heard about the proposed federal rule that would require employers, including most religiously affiliated institutions, to cover birth control as part of their health care benefits. Among those aware of the issue, opinion is closely divided over whether these institutions should be given an exemption to the rule if they object to the use of contraceptives: 48% support an exemption and 44% say they should be required to cover contraceptives like other employers.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press and the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, conducted Feb. 8-12 among 1,501 adults, finds sharp divisions on the issue by religious affiliation, party and ideology.

The Obama administration announced Feb. 10 that it would modify the mandate in response to criticism that the rule would force religious organizations to violate their religious beliefs in providing contraception coverage. The survey shows little difference in opinions among people interviewed before the administration’s proposed modification on Feb. 10 and those interviewed afterwards.

Among Catholics who have heard at least a little about the issue, 55% favor giving religious institutions that object to the use of contraceptives an exemption from the federal rule, while 39% oppose exempting those institutions. White evangelical Protestants, by an even larger margin (68% to 22%), favor giving religious institutions an exemption. White mainline Protestants are divided (44% favor an exemption, 46% are opposed). By contrast, a majority (55%) of the religiously unaffiliated who have heard about the issue say religious institutions that object to the use of contraceptives should be required to cover them like other institutions, while 39% favor giving an exemption to these institutions.

There also are wide partisan and ideological divisions in opinions about the issue. Nearly three-quarters (73%) of Republicans, and 82% of Republican and Republican-leaning independents who agree with the Tea Party, favor giving religious institutions that object to contraceptives an exemption from the new federal rule. By about two-to-one (64% to 29%), Democrats say religious institutions should be required to cover contraceptives like other employers; liberal Democrats (72%) are more likely than conservative and moderate Democrats (58%) to favor this approach.

Independents are split: 48% say religious institutions that object to the use of contraceptives should be required to cover them like other employers, while 46% favor giving religious institutions an exemption.

A narrow majority of men (54%) who have heard at least a little about this issue say religious institutions that object to the use of contraceptives should be given an exemption from the new federal rule. Only about four-in-ten women (42%) agree.

This issue has attracted much more attention from people at either end of the political spectrum than those in the middle. Overall, 71% of Republicans, 63% of Democrats and 58% of independents have heard at least a little about the new federal rule on contraceptive coverage. However, 65% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who agree with the Tea Party have heard a lot about this issue, compared with just 25% of other Republicans and Republican leaners. Among Democrats, about twice as many liberals (43%) as conservatives and moderates (21%) have heard a lot about the new federal rule on contraceptive coverage.

Awareness of the controversy is also far higher among older adults than among the young. Six-in-ten (60%) adults ages 18-29 have heard nothing about the issue, compared with just 24% among those 50 and older. Among people ages 30-49, 43% have not heard about it.

The contraception story was a particular focus of talk show hosts on cable and radio. According to the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism, fully 24% of the time studied on talk shows on both radio and cable news channels during the past week was devoted to the contraception controversy. That contrasts with 8% of news coverage overall.

Where Catholics Stand

The issue of requiring contraceptive coverage is of particular relevance to Catholics, since many of the institutions that initially raised religious objections to the rule are affiliated with the Catholic Church. Along with white Protestants, white Catholics are more likely than members of other religious groups to say that they have heard at least a little about the issue. Among white Catholics, 71% say they have heard about the rule, as have 70% of white evangelical Protestants and 67% of white mainline Protestants.

While 55% of Catholics who have heard about the rule support an exemption to it, opinion varies considerably by frequency of church attendance. Among Catholics who attend Mass at least once a week, 63% support an exemption while 25% say religiously affiliated institutions should have to cover contraceptives like other employers. Among those who attend less often, opinion is evenly divided (48% favor an exemption, 49% oppose one).

About one-quarter of Catholic churchgoers (24%) report having heard about the issue in church. Among Catholics who report attending Mass weekly, 32% said the rule was brought up recently by their priest or other church official.

Although the use of contraception is forbidden by church doctrine, few U.S. Catholics regard the use of contraceptives as morally wrong. Just 15% of Catholics say that using contraceptives is morally wrong, while 41% say it is morally acceptable and 36% say it is not a moral issue. Even among Catholics who attend church weekly, just 27% say contraception is morally wrong.

By comparison, 55% of Catholics (and 68% of those who attend Mass weekly) regard having an abortion as morally wrong. Among the public overall, 48% regard having an abortion as morally wrong.

Another practice forbidden by church doctrine – getting a divorce – is regarded as morally wrong by only 19% of Catholics.

Reactions to Federal Court Decision on Same-Sex Marriage

Almost eight-in-ten Americans (78%) are aware of a federal court ruling last week that a California law banning same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. One-in-three (33%) have heard a lot about the ruling, and 45% have heard a little about it.

Among those who have heard about the issue, more express negative than positive reactions to the ruling. More than four-in-ten (44%) say they are disappointed (31%) or angry (13%). Just a third (33%) say they are pleased (20%) or very happy (13%). About one-in-five (22%) volunteer that they have none of these reactions (15%) or have no opinion (7%).

A majority of Republicans (58%) say they are disappointed (39%) or angry (20%) about the court decision. Just 21% are pleased (15%) or very happy (6%). Democrats, on balance, have a positive reaction to the court’s ruling: 46% are either pleased (27%) or very happy (19%), while 34% are either disappointed (26%) or angry (8%). Independents’ reactions mirror those of the general public, with 42% expressing disappointment (29%) or anger (13%) and 33% saying they are pleased (20%) or very happy (13%).

Among religious groups, white evangelical Protestants have the most negative reactions to the verdict, while the views of white mainline Protestants and Catholics are more mixed. About six-in-ten white evangelical Protestants (59%) say they are either angry (25%) or disappointed (35%), compared with fewer than half of Catholics (42%) or white mainline Protestants (43%). Roughly a third in each of the latter groups is very happy or pleased with the ruling. Among those unaffiliated with a religion, 45% say they are very happy (20%) or pleased (25%) with the ruling, while 30% are disappointed (20%) or angry (10%).

Amid new revelations of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church, Pope Benedict XVI’s job ratings for handling the scandal have plummeted. Only about one-in-ten (12%) say the pope has done an excellent (3%) or good job (9%) in addressing the sex abuse scandal; 71% say he has done a poor (44%) or only fair (27%) job.

The pope’s ratings for addressing the continuing scandal have declined sharply since April 2008, shortly after his visit to the United States. At that time, 39% said he had done an excellent or good job in dealing with the abuse scandal, while 48% said he had done only fair or poor.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press and the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, conducted April 1-5 among 1,001 adults on landlines and cells phones, finds most Americans (74%) have heard either a lot (29%) or a little (45%) about the pope. Awareness of the pope is nearly as high as it was in April, 2008, just after Pope Benedict XVI’s high-profile visit to the U.S., when 84% of the public had heard something about the pope.

Among those who have heard at least a little about the pope, Catholics express more positive opinions of the pope’s handling of the abuse scandal than do Protestants. Nonetheless, Catholics have become more critical of how the pope has addressed the issue: 59% give him only fair (31%) or poor (28%) ratings in the current survey, up from 40% in April 2008. Catholics who attend church at least once a week are more supportive of the pope’s performance than those who attend church less often – though negative ratings among both groups have risen since 2008.

Protestants are more critical than Catholics in rating the job the pope has done addressing the sex abuse scandal. About seven-in-ten (72%) give the pope only fair or poor ratings, up from 46% in 2008. There is little difference between the views of white evangelical and white mainline Protestants. Religiously unaffiliated Americans are the most critical of the pope’s handling of the abuse scandal: 86% say the pope has done a poor or only fair job addressing the situation.

Abortion has dominated the early skirmishing over President Bush’s nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court. But the public takes a more expansive view of the court’s agenda. Indeed, about as many Americans rate the rights of detained terrorist suspects as a very important issue for the Supreme Court as say that about abortion.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press and the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, conducted before Roberts was nominated, finds that abortion is far more important to ideologically committed partisans at either end of the political spectrum than to moderates and independents. The general public also continues to express somewhat ambivalent views on abortion ­ in contrast to conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats.

A consistent majority of Americans (65%) are opposed to overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision establishing a woman’s right to abortion. But most Americans also favor restrictions on abortion. Nearly three-quarters (73%) favor requiring women under age 18 to get parental consent before being allowed to get an abortion.

This ambivalence is reflected in opinions on the overall availability of abortion. About a third (35%) say abortion should be generally available, but 23% favor stricter limits on abortion and 31% favor making it illegal except in cases of rape, incest or to save a woman’s life. Only about one-in-ten (9%) say abortion should never be permitted. Moreover, while nearly six-in-ten (59%) think it would be a good thing to reduce the number of abortions in the U.S., one-third (33%) say they don’t feel this way.

The new study ­ based on separate surveys conducted July 13-17 among 1,502 adults, and July 7-17 among 2,000 adults ­ finds that the public’s views on social issues are complex, defying easy categorization. But religion plays a pivotal role in many of these issues, ranging from stem cell research to gay marriage.

The survey finds continuing strong public support for stem cell research. By nearly two-to-one (57%-30%), the public believes that it is more important to conduct stem cell research that may result in new medical cures than to not destroy the potential life of embryos involved in such research. Support for stem cell research has been growing among major religious groups ­ with the notable exception of white evangelical Protestants. Only about a third of white evangelicals (32%) support such research, compared with large majorities of seculars (77%), mainline Protestants (70%) and white Catholics (61%).

A clear majority of the public (68%) continues to support the death penalty for persons convicted or murder, but only 37% think the death penalty should be applied to people who committed capital offenses as minors. While members of the major religious traditions differ over the death penalty generally ­ with Protestants more supportive than Catholics ­ comparable majorities of religious groups oppose the use of the death penalty for minors convicted of murder.

The public remains divided over how far physicians should be allowed to go in ending the lives of terminally ill patients. About half (51%) favor letting doctors give such patients the means with which to end their lives, but there is less support for physicians being allowed to help dying patients commit suicide (44%).

And while a majority of Americans (53%) oppose allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally, support for gay marriage is at its highest point since July 2003. For the first time, a majority (53%) favors permitting gays and lesbians to enter into legal arrangements that would give them many of the same rights as married couples.

Varying Opinions on Life Issues

The general public takes varying, and at times contradictory, attitudes toward the issues that constitute the so-called “culture of life.” This also is the case for members of major religious traditions.

White evangelical Protestants overwhelmingly adopt a pro-life stance on abortion: 68% believe abortion should not be permitted at all, or should be allowed only in cases of rape, incest or to save the woman’s life. A smaller majority of white evangelicals (58%) oppose making it legal for doctors to give terminally ill patients the means to end their lives.

In the case of stem cell research, half of white evangelicals say it is more important to avoid destroying the potential life of human embryos than to conduct stem cell research that may lead to new medical cures. At the same time, white evangelicals strongly support the death penalty for those convicted of murder; just 15% oppose the death penalty.

White Catholics also have inconsistent attitudes on life issues. Roughly four-in-ten take a pro-life stance on abortion (43%) and in opposing physicians being permitted to help dying patients to end their lives (42%). Just three-in-ten white Catholics (29%) say it is more important to avoid destroying the potential life of human embryos in stem cell research than to conduct research that may result in new medical cures. And about the same number (27%) oppose the death penalty.

For their part, seculars overwhelmingly dissent from pro-life positions on abortion, stem cell research and end-of-life questions. More seculars than white evangelicals or mainline Protestants oppose the death penalty for convicted murderers; still, only about three-in-ten (29%) express this view.

Court Issues: Beyond Abortion

Among the possible issues facing the Supreme Court, abortion is viewed as very important by large numbers of liberal Democrats (80%) and conservative Republicans (73%). White evangelical Protestants also place great emphasis on this issue (75%).

For liberal Democrats, no other issue rivals abortion in importance. But conservatives and white evangelicals rate several issues highly. While three-quarters of white evangelicals view abortion as very important, nearly as many place great importance on court rulings on the rights of detained terrorist suspects (69%), and whether to permit religious displays on government property (68%).

Abortion is a major issue for those at either end of the political spectrum, but it also is viewed as very important by younger women. Roughly three-quarters (76%) of women under age 50 rate abortion as a very important issue for the court; far fewer males in that age group (58%) see abortion as a high priority. Women under age 50 also are far more likely than older women to attach great importance to possible court rulings on abortion.

Decades of Division

Through more than 30 years of attention to abortion in policy debates and Supreme Court nominations, public opinion on the issue has remained remarkably stable. This is the case with both views of the availability of abortion, and of the Roe v. Wade decision establishing women’s right to abortion. (For more on attitudes toward Roe v. Wade, see “Supreme Court’s Image Declines as Nomination Battle Looms,” June 15).

The overall pattern of opinion is similar on both issues. Members of both political parties are divided in views of the availability of abortion. Nearly two-thirds of liberal Democrats (64%) believe abortion should be generally available to those who want it. That compares with only about a third of moderate and conservative Democrats (34%).

About one-in-five conservative Republicans (22%) believe abortion should not be permitted at all; just 1% of moderate and liberal Republicans agree. And roughly twice as many conserva
tive Republicans as GOP liberals and moderates say abortion should be banned, or allowed only in cases of incest, rape or to protect the life of the woman (71% vs. 36%).

There also are wide differences among religious groups over this question. Most seculars (60%) believe abortion should be generally available, and a plurality of white mainline Protestants agree. About two-thirds of white evangelicals (68%) believe abortion should not be permitted or allowed only in cases of rape, incest or to save the woman’s life. White Catholics are deeply divided over abortion, with about three-in-ten (31%) it should be generally available, and 43% saying it should be banned or only legal in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother.

A plurality of college graduates (46%) say abortion should be generally available, while just 29% of those with a high school education express that view. But there are no significant gender differences in these opinions. And while women under age 50 are much more likely than men in that age group to view abortion as a very important issue for the Supreme Court, they hold similar views concerning the availability of abortion.

Morality of Abortion

The public also is deeply split over the moral implications of abortion. A plurality (41%) thinks abortion is wrong in some circumstances; 29% feel abortion is morally wrong in nearly all circumstances; and about a quarter (26%) believe that abortion is not a moral issue.

A large majority (60%) of those who believe that abortion is morally wrong in nearly all circumstances support overturning the Roe v. Wade decision.

In contrast, 91% those who believe abortion is not a moral issue overwhelmingly favor continued access to abortion.

Those with mixed views on the morality of abortion strongly oppose overturning Roe v. Wade. But many with this opinion favor stricter limits on abortion, with roughly a third (35%) saying abortion should be against the law except in cases of rape, incest, and to save the woman’s life.

Reduce Number of Abortions

Regardless of their views on the legality of abortion, most Americans (59%) believe it would be a good thing to reduce the number of abortions. However, a sizable minority (33%) disagrees.

Nearly three-quarters of Republicans (72%) say it would be good to reduce the number of abortions, compared with smaller majorities of independents (55%) and Democrats (51%). Those who are married are much more likely than unmarried people to say it would be a good thing to reduce the number of abortions (by 66%-50%). And a narrow majority of seculars (51%) feel it would not be a good thing to decrease the number of abortions.

Broad Support for Parental Consent

As has been the case for more than a decade, most of the public favors requiring women under age 18 to obtain the consent of at least one parent before being allowed to get an abortion. Nearly three-quarters of Americans (73%) support such a requirement, while just 22% are opposed. Like other opinions on abortion, views on this issue have changed little over the years ­ in 1992, an identical percentage favored requiring young women to obtain parental consent before being permitted to get an abortion.

Large majorities in all major religious groups ­ and fully two-thirds of seculars (67%) ­ believe that women under 18 should receive parental consent before being able to obtain an abortion. However, liberal Democrats are divided on this issue; 50% favor requiring young women to get the consent of at least one parent before getting an abortion, but 44% are opposed. By contrast, there is strong sentiment in favor of requiring parental consent among moderate and conservative Democrats (72%), and overwhelming support among conservative Republicans (94%) and moderate and liberal Republicans (81%).

Access to “Morning After” Pill

There is less public agreement on allowing women to obtain the so-called “morning after pill” without a doctor’s prescription. Anti-abortion groups argue that the morning after pill induces an abortion because the drug can cause the body to reject a newly fertilized egg; supporters of abortion rights say the pill constitutes emergency contraception.

Most Americans (52%) favor allowing women to get the morning after pill without a doctor’s prescription, while 37% are opposed. Groups that are most supportive of keeping abortion generally available ­ seculars and liberal Democrats ­ also strongly favor allowing easier access to the morning after pill (77% of seculars, 72% of liberal Democrats).

Similarly, the same groups that strongly oppose abortion ­ conservative Republicans and white evangelical Protestants ­ also oppose making it easier for women to get the morning after pill (58% of conservative Republicans, 52% of white evangelicals). There also is a modest gender divide in views of the morning after pill, with men somewhat more supportive than women of allowing greater access to this drug (56% of men vs. 48% of women).

No Conflict Between Abstinence, Birth Control

Debates over sex education in schools often pit abstinence instruction against providing students information on birth control methods. But the public sees no conflict in pursuing both of these approaches: 78% favor allowing public schools to provide students with birth control information; nearly as many (76%) believe schools should teach teenagers to abstain from sex until marriage.

Solid majorities in every major religious group say schools should be allowed to provide students with information on birth control methods. But a sizable minority of white evangelical Protestants (30%) are opposed.

White evangelicals also are among the most supportive of having public schools teach teenagers to abstain from sex until marriage. Seculars express the greatest reservations to schools promoting abstinence; 62% support that approach, while roughly a third (34%) are opposed.

The youngest Americans ­ those ages 18-24 ­ are highly supportive of schools both promoting abstinence and providing information about birth control. Roughly eight-in-ten (83%) favor schools providing birth control information, while 75% think schools should teach teenagers to abstain from sex until marriage.

Most Favor Stem Cell Research

Public awareness of, and support for, stem cell research appears to be leveling off, after showing significant gains from 2002 to 2004. Currently, 48% say they have heard a lot about the issue, which is little changed since last December (47%).

More Americans continue to say it is more important to conduct stem cell research that might result in new medical cures than to avoid destroying the potential life of human embryos involved in such research (by 57% to 30%). That is about the same level of support for stem cell research as last December, but up modestly since August 2004 (52%). Three years ago, in March 2002, just 43% supported stem cell research.

As in the past, greater awareness of the stem cell debate is associated with support for stem cell research.

Roughly two-thirds of those who have heard a lot about the issue (68%) believe it is more important to conduct stem cell research than to not destroy the potential life of embryos.

That compares with 49% of those who have heard a little about the issue, and just a third of those who are unfamiliar with the debate over stem cell research.

Where Support Has Grown

Three years ago, Americans were only dimly aware of ­ and fairly evenly divided over ­ stem cell research. Since then, support for this research has grown among most demographic and political groups. The shift has been most striking among middle-aged Americans (ages 50-64), high school graduates, mainline Protestants and white Catholics, and liberal Democrats. There are some exceptions to this pattern, however. Just a third of conservative Republicans say it is more important to conduct stem cell research, virtually the same percentage as in March 2002 (32%).

Over the same period, moderate and liberal Republicans have become more supportive of stem cell research; as a result, the gap between conservative Republicans and GOP moderates and liberals has grown from 16 points to 29 points. White evangelical Protestants also remain opposed to stem cell research. About a third (32%) favor such research today, while 50% are opposed. Three years ago, 26% of evangelicals backed stem cell research.

What Shapes Stem Cell Views?

Supporters and opponents of stem cell research draw on very different sources when thinking about the issue. Roughly half (52%) of opponents say their religious beliefs are the biggest influence on their thinking, while 13% cite what they have seen or read in the media and 12% mention their education.

Conservative Republican opponents are especially likely (70%) to cite religion as their main influence, as are evangelical Protestant opponents (69%).

Among supporters, 31% say the biggest influence on their thinking is the media, and 28% mention their education. Just 7% say religion is the most important influence. College graduates (44%) who favor the research are particularly likely to name education as their primary influence, as are pro-research liberal Democrats (43%).

Physician-Assisted Suicide

A narrow majority of Americans (51%) favor making it legal for doctors to give terminally ill patients the means to end their lives. As in past Pew surveys, there is less support (44%) for physicians actually aiding such patients in committing suicide. Attitudes on these end-of-life issues have changed very little since July 2003.

There continue to be clear differences among major religious groups in views of how far physicians should be permitted to go in assisting terminally ill patients to end their lives. Majorities of seculars and white mainline Protestants favor allowing physicians to give the terminally ill the means to end their lives, and to assist such patients in committing suicide. White Catholics are divided over these issues, while white evangelical Protestants are widely opposed to doctors taking any measures to help terminally ill patients to end their lives.

Men also are more supportive than women of allowing physicians to end the lives of their terminally ill patients. A majority of men (55%) favor making it legal for doctors to give such patients the means to end their lives; 47% of women agree. There is a comparable gender gap in views of physician-assisted suicide.

Looking Back at Schiavo Case

Four months after Congress passed legislation transferring jurisdiction in the Terri Schiavo case to the federal courts, the overwhelming majority of Americans (74%) indicate that Congress should not have involved itself in the matter. White evangelical Protestants are more supportive of Congress’s actions than are members of other religious groups, conservatives are more supportive than moderates and liberals, and Republicans are more supportive than Democrats and independents. But even among these groups, large majorities (69% of white evangelicals, 68% of conservatives and 65% of Republicans) believe that Congress should have stayed out of the case.

Death Penalty, But Not for Minors

Roughly two-thirds of Americans (68%) support the death penalty for people convicted of murder, up slightly from two years ago (64%). However, public support for the death penalty was greater in the late 1990s (74% in 1999).

But most Americans continue to oppose the death penalty for minors. By 54%-37%, the public opposes the death penalty for those who have been convicted of murder when they are under age 18. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court abolished the death penalty in such cases, citing a “national consensus” on the issue.

The pattern of opinion on applying the death penalty to minors is quite different than for the death penalty generally. For instance, there are only modest gender differences, at most, in support for the death penalty (70% of men, 66% of women). But there is a sizable gender gap in attitudes toward the death penalty for those convicted of murder who are under age 18; 47% of men support the death penalty for minors, compared with only about a quarter of women (27%).

And while there are significant differences among religious groups in views of the overall application of the death penalty, there is striking agreement in opinions on the death penalty for those under age 18. Only about four-in-ten white evangelicals, mainline Protestants, white Catholics and seculars favor the death penalty under these circumstances.

Modest Increase in Gay Marriage Support

Public support for allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally has rebounded a bit after declining between 2003 and 2004. Today, 36% of Americans favor allowing gays and lesbians to marry, up from 32% in December 2004. The percentage favoring gay civil unions has risen as well. Currently, 53% favor allowing gays and lesbians to enter into legal arrangements providing them with many of the same rights as married couples; that compares with 48% last August.

Support for gay marriage and gay civil unions has increased slightly among most religious groups. However, support for civil unions has increased significantly among white evangelical Protestants, from 26% in December 2004 to 35% today. This increase, however, is concentrated primarily among low-commitment evangelicals, a majority of whom now support civil unions.

There remain substantial divisions in views of gay marriage and civil unions across political groups. Nearly seven-in-ten liberals support gay marriage and eight-in-ten support civil unions, up from 59% and 70%, respectively in 2004. Among conservatives, however, support for gay marriage stands at 14%, and support for civil unions has actually declined slightly (from 35% in 2004 to 31% today).

Similarly, Democrats and independents are more supportive of gay marriage and civil unions today than they were a year ago, and remain much more supportive of both proposals than are Republicans.

In line with these findings, there has also been a slight decline (from 35% in August 2004 to 29% today) in the number of Americans expressing support for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.

In this paper, we use comparative international data to analyze a broad array of issues relating to the global gender gap: Are women “doves” and men “hawks” when it comes to foreign policy and security matters? Do men and women have different beliefs on religion and morality? Is it possible to identify regional patterns in gender differences? And specifically, what are the major fault lines in opinions among men and women in predominantly Muslim countries?

To find the answers to these and other questions, we used the Pew Global Attitudes Project, a series of worldwide public opinion surveys administered by local organizations under the direction of Princeton Survey Research Associates International. To date, the Project has interviewed over 74,000 people in 50 populations (49 countries and the Palestinian Authority).

A commentary released by the Project last October addressed some of the general questions about the way men and women view their lives and increasing global interconnectedness. Here are the primary conclusions (Some copies of the release are available at the conference or on the Pew Research Center’s website at www.people-press.org):

• On the whole, women are happier with their lives and say they’ve made personal progress more than men.
• Within regions, men and women agree on almost every issue addressed, from personal progress to social issues, such as the acceptability of homosexuality.
• Men are more optimistic about the lives of their children and the future than are women.
• When asked about modern electronics and technological advances that are so much a part of the globalizing world, both men and women agree that having these available is a change for the better. But in 37 of 44 countries, “boys” like their high-tech “toys” much more than women.
• Birth control is popular among both the sexes, but in two-thirds of the countries surveyed, women are more likely to think having the ability to control reproduction is a change for the better.
• Most people around the world are dissatisfied with the way things are going in their country, but women are most dissatisfied. The difference is greatest in France where 39% of men and only 26% of women are satisfied with national conditions, and in the U.S., where 47% of men are satisfied but only 36% of women agree.

This paper builds upon this initial analysis and looks specifically at the opinions of Muslim men and women on issues ranging from religion to social and political values. It also compares these views with those of men and women worldwide. It concludes with a look at how the sexes view current foreign policy issues and terrorism. Several primary conclusions can be drawn from this work:

• Few gender gaps exist among Muslims regarding the role of Islam in political life, and when gender differences do surface, it is within specific countries and not part of a broader pattern.
• Muslim men are more likely to favor more traditional roles for their female counterparts, while more women express a desire to bring gender equality into the workplace and into their marriages.
• Women, particularly in the Muslim world, decline to answer polling questions or say they don’t know at a much higher rate than men. Yet there is a pronounced pattern to their DK/Refusal response, suggesting that it is the type of question that determines whether or not women offer an opinion.
• When attitudes are measured only among those who respond to questions, men and women share similar opinions about the role of Islam in their society, women in the workplace and a host of political and personal issues.
• Suicide bombings and violent acts of killing are not just supported by men. As many women as men in several predominantly Muslim countries say such activities are justified.
• In the most recent survey taken in March 2004, men and women within their own countries in Muslim nations share common views on foreign policy issues and the war in Iraq, suggesting that national identity is more important than gender differences in these cases.
• Among Muslims, there is little difference between the genders on foreign policy issues, the war in Iraq and favorability of world leaders in the U.S. and Europe. However, women are somewhat less likely to express an opinion on these issues.

Muslim Surveys

In the 44-nation survey of the Pew Global Attitudes Project, 14 countries where Muslims are either the overwhelming majority or prominent minorities were asked a series of questions pertaining specifically to the role of Islam and governance. In smaller, subsequent surveys, additional populations were surveyed. Those populations noted as “predominantly Muslim” are Pakistan, Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Mali, Senegal and Uzbekistan. Smaller surveys incorporated the Palestinian Authority, Morocco, and Kuwait. Muslims surveyed in countries where they are a minority of their country’s population are Ghana, Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda. In three cases where there are Muslim minorities — Ivory Coast, Ghana and Uganda — gender breakouts are not reported due to small sample size.

Islam and Politics

Majorities in over half of the Muslim nations surveyed say Islam currently plays a large role in the governance of their society and just as many say it should play that role. Overall, men and women share the same views within their countries in nearly every nation surveyed. Only in Uzbekistan and Jordan are there significant gaps in opinion between the sexes. A 12-point gap exists in Uzbekistan with 48% of Uzbek men and 60% of women saying Islam currently plays a large role; in Jordan, more men than women say the role of Islam is significant (58% to 48%).

When asked of the role Islam should play in the governance of their countries, opinions correspond with the respondent’s beliefs in the role Islam currently plays. Majorities of Muslims in 9 of the original 14 nations surveyed said Islam should play a large role. In four others (Lebanon, Turkey, Senegal and Uzbekistan), respondents are split on this issue and only in Tanzania do Muslims say Islam should play a small role in the politics of their country. Again, men and women view the political role of their religion in roughly the same way.

In Nigeria, a country grappling with the issue of Sharia law, it may be surprising to find that women express a stronger belief that Islam should play a large role in the governance of their country. Although more than eight-in-ten respondents of both genders agree that Islam currently plays a large role, only 66% of Nigerian men say they think it should play a large role while 79% of women hold such views. Jordanian men and women hold differing opinions on many issues, the role of Islam being one. Men in Jordan say they want Islam to play a large role in politics much more than women and women are more likely to say that their religion currently plays less of a role in politics than men.

Democracy Can Work Here

Majorities of Muslims surveyed by Pew say that “Western style democracy” can work in their own country, with Indonesia a notable exception. Few Muslims say that democracy is “a Western way of doing things that would not work here.” The latter view is expressed by a majority of Indonesians (53%), and sizable minorities in Turkey and the Palestinian Authority both at 37%.

The belief that democracy can work in their country is shared fairly equally by both men and women. The exception is Bangladesh; 76% of Bangladeshi men and just 42% of Bangladeshi women say democracy can work here. Even after accounting for the higher non-response rate among women, Bangladeshi men believe more strongly than women in the democratic prospects for their countries.

However, the most significant change in the idea of “Western-style democracy” from 2002 to 2003 is the number of women who express an opinion. Perhaps because of the Iraq war and the increased international discussion of regime change in the Middle East, only a quarter of the women in Pakistan did not offer an opinion in 2003, whereas 57% did not do so in 2002. Less dramatically, yet still significantly, the number of men who did not respond decreased 17 points, from 21% in 2002 to 4% in 2003.

Interestingly, since 2002, Turkish respondents (both men and women) have increased their belief that Western-style democracy can work there. While 43% of men and 44% of women held such views in 2002, fully 51% of men and 49% of women said democracy could work in Turkey in 2003.

Democratic Aspirations

In addition to large numbers of both genders saying that democracy could work in their country, many Muslim men and women register high levels of support for the key democratic principles. Majorities in six countries, (Turkey, Mali, Bangladesh, Senegal, Nigeria and Lebanon) say it is very important to be able to live in a country where you can openly say what you think and criticize the government, have freedom of the press, and open and honest elections. Men and women within those countries have nearly identical views about these key freedoms yet women tend to give an opinion much less often than men. This is particularly the case in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Turkey and to a lesser degree elsewhere. Women who do register an opinion place equal importance on these democratic aspirations.

The DK/Refusal Effect

The discrepancy in the way men and women register opinions on various issues mentioned above shows that women, particularly in Muslim countries, respond “don’t know” or “refused” to questions with much more regularity than men. But, interestingly, the kind of question makes a big difference. Two spheres exist, the personal, home sphere dealing directly with women’s roles and personal lives, and a worldly sphere relating to opinions about the government, international problems, and political views. When asked about government policy or whether or not democracy can work in their country, fully 60% of women in Pakistan, (21% of men) 42% of Bangladeshi women (18% of men) and 18% of Turkish women (10% of men) do not register a response. The same is true when asked about the role of Islam in politics. Pakistani men register opinions at a much higher rate than women.

Yet, when asked about personal issues that deal directly with them, women are much more likely to offer a response. For example, when asked to agree or disagree with the statement, “women should have the right to decide if they wear a veil,” only 5% of Pakistani women did not respond, all Bangladeshi women gave a response and only 3% of Turkish women (equal their male counterparts) failed to respond. The dk/refusal rates are nearly identical when asked a series of questions about women’s role in the workplace and religious education.

After accounting for this difference by repercentaging the results between men and women, the findings are striking – the gender gap shrinks to near irrelevance. For example, 68% of Pakistani men said religious leaders should play a larger role in politics, whereas only 57% of women held that view. After accounting for the dk/refusal effect by basing the total on those who registered a response, the percentage of women believing religious leaders should play a larger role in politics was actually greater than men. Fully 84% of women and 74% of men who responded took that view.

The Role of Women in the Workplace

Women may not register opinions at a fairly high rate when asked about politics or government, but it is clear that they willingly share them regarding their roles in the social structure of their country and their personal values. This is especially true when Muslim men and women are asked about women’s roles in society.

In many countries, there is a significant gender gap among Muslims over whether women should be permitted to work outside the home. In Bangladesh, 57% of women completely agree that they should be allowed to work, compared with 36% of men. The gap is nearly as wide in Pakistan, where 41% of women strongly agree with that statement, compared with roughly a quarter of men (24%). Even in countries where Muslims broadly support women’s right to work outside the home, such as Lebanon and Turkey, differences between men and women are sizable.

Indonesia and Jordan are notable exceptions to this pattern. In those countries, support for women working is equally weak among members of both sexes. Just 24% of Muslim women in Indonesia, and 20% of men, strongly agree that women should work outside the home, and support is even lower in Jordan (16% to 13% respectively).

There is less of a gender gap over restrictions against men and women being employed in the same workplace. In most cases, women are as supportive of these restrictions as are men. While women in Bangladesh are much more likely than men to strongly favor the right of women to hold jobs, they also are more supportive of separating men and women in the workplace. More than a third of Muslim women in Bangladesh (36%) completely agree that such restrictions are appropriate, compared with 20% of Muslim men.

Type of Marriage

Questions on the role of women in the workplace were not only asked of Muslims. In the Global Attitudes Project inaugural survey in 2002, publics around the world were asked to identify the type of marriage that was most appealing to them. Majorities throughout Europe, the Americas, Asia and Africa expressed the desire for both spouses to have jobs and share in household and child care duties. A majority of Americans agree, but to a lesser degree than many Africans and Turks, with 58% of the total U.S. population surveyed supporting both spouses working and 37% disagreeing. There is a large difference of opinion among predominantly Muslim countries, such as Egypt, Pakistan and Jordan, which are the sole countries to favor the more traditional role of women, where the man provides the income and the woman takes care of the household and children.

Homosexuality, Religion and Morality

The Global Attitudes Project reported a gaping transatlantic divide on social issues from the acceptability of homosexuality to social welfare between the U.S. and Europe. While the two regions are divided, another transatlantic gender gap also exists. Women in the U.S. are more accepting of homosexuality than American men, as are nearly all western European women.

Even among Muslims in regions as diverse as Pakistan, Turkey, Bangladesh and Lebanon, women express views of acceptance for homosexuality more than their male counterparts. The outlaying exceptions are Italy where both genders register almost equally large endorsements for homosexual acceptability (73% of men and 71% of women), and among Muslims in Uzbekistan, Indonesia and Jordan where an equally insignificant difference between the genders opposes homosexuality.

Women around the world say religion is more important to them than men in every region, in highly religious countries such as those in Latin America and in more secular societies such as Canada and Europe. Only in Muslim countries such as Pakistan and Indonesia, where nearly everyone expressed the importance of religion in their lives, were there few gaps between genders. On the question of whether or not you have to believe in God to be a moral person, women in 34 of 39 countries (question not permitted in China, Vietnam, Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt) say that belief in God is tantamount to personal morality. Where men hold this opinion more than women, it is only by a slim margin – for example in France 16% of men and 10% of women hold this opinion and in Nigeria the margin is 86% to 84% respectively.

With women expressing greater importance of religion in their lives, how do Muslim women feel about religious education for their children? The Muslim world is divided over whether schools should focus more on ‘practical’ subjects and less on religious education. Half of the countries surveyed, including Turkey and Uzbekistan, support putting greater emphasis on practical education and several other countries, notably Indonesia, Pakistan and Jordan strongly oppose this idea. Yet despite the difference in male and female attitudes toward religion in Muslim societies, there is no large gap between the genders on religious education. The greatest difference is found in Nigeria where 26% of men completely agree that practical education should be given precedent with only 18% of women saying the same thing. Elsewhere, in Turkey, Pakistan and Uzbekistan, men and women mirror each other’s response.

Muslim men and women are also in agreement within their own countries on whether their religion should tolerate diverse interpretations of Islam’s teachings or if there is only one true interpretation of those teachings. The only significant gender gap is in Pakistan where 39% of women who offered a response favor diversity with 27% of men agreeing.

Threats to Islam

The perception that there are serious threats to Islam is widespread and growing in the Muslim world. This is most pronounced in Middle Eastern countries such as Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco and the Palestinian Authority, where over two thirds of respondents in each country see Islam threatened. But this view is not limited to that region alone. Since the war in Iraq, over half of Indonesians (59%), Pakistanis (64%) and half of Turks feel major threats to their religion. These proportions are all up considerably since the Pew survey began polling in 2002, before the war in Iraq. Even in Nigeria, respondents saying Islam is seriously threatened have doubled since 2002, from 21% to 42%.

Men in most places feel threat more intensely than women, with the exception of Uzbekistan where women site serious threats to Islam by 4 percentage points over men. The biggest gender gap in opinion exists in Senegal where 71% of men see Islam threatened, but only 45% of women and Bangladesh (59% and 33% respectively). But the largest shift in opinion from 2002 to 2003 was in Pakistan. In the span of one year, men seeing a threat jumped 17 percentage points while women perceiving threats to Islam skyrocketed from 19% to 70%.

But what are these serious threats? Polling in 2002, prior to the US-led war in Iraq, found that people were not primarily worried about external, political, military or cultural threats. Instead most cited internal threats within their own country, such as government interference with religion, a diminishing commitment to Muslim teachings and schools among the young, or a lack of Islamic unity and moral decline.

Men and women express very different views of threats to Islam. Men list “terrorism” more often than women and also say that the U.S. and the West pose larger threats to Islam than their female counterparts. This is particularly prominent in Bangladesh and Pakistan. Women see local government and politics as larger threats to their religion, especially in Indonesia and Turkey. Women around the Muslim world agree that internal religious issues and the direction of Muslim education within their countries pose large problems for Islam. This is particularly distinct in Turkey where twice as many women than men say religious issues within Islam are the main threat to their faith.

Lebanon and Jordan are exceptional in that both sexes cite external threats to Islam more often than internal threats, a departure from any other country surveyed. There, terrorism and U.S./Western threats and even the influence of other religions far outweigh any internal threats to their religion. In addition, men and women share in this opinion equally, with nearly identical emphasis placed on those threats outside their country.

Similarly, the genders in Uzbekistan have few discrepancies in their responses on this issue, each saying that people within their own country (specifically Vakhabists, or religious fundamentalists) posed the largest threat to their religion. The threat of terrorism was also of primary concern to Uzbek men and women and they agreed to equal degree that the problem threatened their religion.

In sum, women in the Muslim world are more focused on internal threats to Islam, whereas men are more threatened by the other religions and the U.S./Western war on terrorism.

Suicide bombings

In the 14 Muslim countries surveyed in the inaugural 2002 poll, men were more likely to say suicide bombings and other forms of violence against civilian targets is justifiable than women. However, the gaps between the sexes are not large, with two contrasting exceptions. In Nigeria, a majority of men say suicide bombing is justifiable (56%) and only 36% of women say so. But 4,500 miles to the east in Pakistan, a majority of women who gave a response say such violence is justifiable much more than men. The re-percentaged ratio shows that 55% of women compared with 37% of men believed suicide bombing could be justified.

In an era where women are themselves joining the ranks of suicide bombers in the Middle East, it may come as little surprise that nearly three quarters (72%) of Lebanese women agree with their male counterparts that such actions are justifiable. In Jordan, the number of women sharing that view slightly outnumbers men, 45% to 41%.

Two additional questions regarding suicide bombing were asked in 2004 using specific scenarios. One asked about the justifiability of suicide bombing carried out by Palestinians against Israeli citizens and the other asked about such acts carried out against American and other Westerners in Iraq. When presented with these two cases, the number of people in all four countries saying that violence is justified, increased, and, in Turkey, increased considerably.

But the most astonishing figures come from Muslim women in Jordan and Morocco. There, more women than men say suicide bombings against Israeli citizens are justified, with fully 89% of Jordanian women and 77% of Moroccan women saying so compared with 85% and 71% of their male counterparts respectively. In Pakistan and Turkey, more Muslim men than women say such acts of violence are justified, yet still 33% of Pakistani women say so compared with 31% of Turkish men and 17% of Turkish women.

The same pattern holds when asked about suicide bombing of Americans and other westerners in Iraq. Again, Jordanian and Moroccan women believe these acts are justifiable by a slight margin over men in their country, whereas it is the men in Pakistan and Turkey who say this.

Foreign Policy and the War in Iraq

This paper has focused primarily on Muslim views but it is worth noting that men and women within their countries have very similar views of foreign policy issues. A nine country survey March 2004 examined the war in Iraq one year after it began and revisited some of the same questions about the America’s image in the world and U.S.-European relations that the inaugural survey examined. A few key points are worth mentioning. Overall, there is little difference in the views of men and women on most foreign policy questions, issues dealing with the Iraq war and use of force within their own countries. In addition, no clear regional patterns emerge.

One interesting finding from the new survey supports Pew’s original analysis– that men in all countries except Britain express more optimism about their lives and those of their children. In 2004 men believe people from their country who move to the United States have a better life more than women. This is especially true in Jordan where 38% of men believe immigrants to America are better off, but only 25% of women agree. In Britain women are only slightly more hopeful of the lives of British immigrants with 43% believing them better off and men just behind at 40%.

What is apparent is that the DK/Refusal effect both widens and narrows the gender gap with regard to foreign policy questions. As noted previously, women in all parts of the world are less likely to give an opinion on political issues than men, but taking that into account only muddies the picture and highlights the importance of intra-country differences.

After accounting for the higher rates of opinion giving, Pakistani men and women tend to fall further apart on most questions, yet in most other nations, the gap narrows. Three examples exemplify this finding: When asked to rate the United Nations, men in six of nine countries surveyed have a more favorable view of the world institution than women. Yet, due to the DK/Refused effect, women in six of nine countries rate the U.N better than men and the gap is narrowed in all of the remaining three. Smaller differences in view on foreign policy questions such as the relationship between the U.S. and Western Europe and pre-emption, show the same pattern, where, after accounting for opinion registry women and men the gender gaps narrow.

Conclusion

This analysis fails to detect any systematic difference between the genders when it comes to issues of governance, foreign policy and current international conflicts. Only on specific domestic issues of particular immediacy to men and women do the genders differ in their views. The data suggest the historic gender gap has diminished and one’s sex does not appear to predict opinion on a variety of issues the way it once did. The findings outlined here are only a first step, not the definitive work measuring opinion differences. Future in-depth analysis of other important cleavages such as age and education will be crucial to our understanding of ways in which men and women voice their opinions and which issues gender differences will surface in the future. For in the end, we may find we are not so different after all.

The speed of the war in Iraq and the prevailing belief that the Iraqi people are better off as a result have modestly improved the image of America. But in most countries, opinions of the U.S. are markedly lower than they were a year ago. The war has widened the rift between Americans and Western Europeans, further inflamed the Muslim world, softened support for the war on terrorism, and significantly weakened global public support for the pillars of the post-World War II era — the U.N. and the North Atlantic alliance.

These are the principal findings from the latest survey of the Pew Global Attitudes Project, conducted over the past month in 20 countries and the Palestinian Authority. It is being released together with a broader survey of 44 nations conducted in 2002, which covers attitudes on globalization, democratization and the role of Islam in governance and society.

While the postwar poll paints a mostly negative picture of the image of America, its people and policies, the broader Pew Global Attitudes survey shows wide support for the fundamental economic and political values that the U.S. has long promoted. Globalization, the free market model and democratic ideals are accepted in all corners of the world. Most notably, the 44-nation survey found strong democratic aspirations in most of the Muslim publics surveyed. The postwar update confirms that these aspirations remain intact despite the war and its attendant controversies.

The new survey shows, however, that public confidence in the United Nations is a major victim of the conflict in Iraq. Positive ratings for the world body have tumbled in nearly every country for which benchmark measures are available. Majorities or pluralities in most countries believe that the war in Iraq showed the U.N. to be not so important any more. The idea that the U.N. is less relevant is much more prevalent now than it was just before the war, and is shared by people in countries that backed the war, the U.S. and Great Britain, as well as in nations that opposed it, notably France and Germany.

In addition, majorities in five of seven NATO countries surveyed support a more independent relationship with the U.S. on diplomatic and security affairs. Fully three-quarters in France (76%), and solid majorities in Turkey (62%), Spain (62%), Italy (61%) and Germany (57%) believe Western Europe should take a more independent approach than it has in the past. ?

The British and Americans disagree — narrow majorities in both countries want the partnership between the U.S. and Western Europe to remain as close as ever. But the percentage of Americans favoring continued close ties with Western Europe has fallen — from 62% before the war to 53% in the current survey. In fact, the American people have cooled on France and Germany as much as the French and Germans have cooled on the U.S.

In Western Europe, negative views of America have declined somewhat since just prior to the war in Iraq, when anti-war sentiment peaked. But since last summer, favorable opinions of the U.S have slipped in nearly every country for which trend measures are available. Views of the American people, while still largely favorable, have fallen as well. The belief that the U.S. pursues a unilateralist foreign policy, which had been extensive last summer, has only grown in the war’s aftermath.

In Great Britain and Italy, positive opinions of the U.S. increased considerably since just before the war (see page 19). Of the 21 publics surveyed in the new poll, overall support for the United States is greatest by far in Israel, where 79% view the U.S. favorably. Israelis also express near-universal support for the U.S.-led war on terrorism, with 85% favoring the fight against terrorism. Majorities in Western Europe and Australia also back the war on terrorism, but support has slipped since last summer in both France and Germany (15 points in France, 10 points in Germany).

In addition, the bottom has fallen out of support for America in most of the Muslim world. Negative views of the U.S. among Muslims, which had been largely limited to countries in the Middle East, have spread to Muslim populations in Indonesia and Nigeria. Since last summer, favorable ratings for the U.S. have fallen from 61% to 15% in Indonesia and from 71% to 38% among Muslims in Nigeria.

In the wake of the war, a growing percentage of Muslims see serious threats to Islam. Specifically, majorities in seven of eight Muslim populations surveyed express worries that the U.S. might become a military threat to their countries. Even in Kuwait, where people have a generally favorable view of the United States, 53% voice at least some concern that the U.S. could someday pose a threat.

Support for the U.S.-led war on terrorism also has fallen in most Muslim publics. Equally significant, solid majorities in the Palestinian Authority, Indonesia and Jordan — and nearly half of those in Morocco and Pakistan — say they have at least some confidence in Osama bin Laden to “do the right thing regarding world affairs.” Fully 71% of Palestinians say they have confidence in bin Laden in this regard.

More generally, the postwar update survey of 16,000 respondents finds, in most countries that are friendly to the United States, only modest percentages have confidence that President Bush will do the right thing in international affairs. People in most countries rate Vladimir Putin, Gerhard Schroeder, Jacques Chirac and Tony Blair more highly than they do Bush. The president also ranks slightly behind Blair in the United States, mostly due to political partisanship. Nearly all Republicans (95%) express confidence in Bush, compared with 64% of Democrats.

War Views Entrenched

The war itself did little to change opinions about the merits of using force in Iraq. In countries where there was strong opposition to the war, people overwhelmingly believe their governments made the right decision to stay out of the conflict. In countries that backed the war, with the notable exception of Spain, publics believe their governments made the right decision. In Great Britain, support for the war has grown following its successful outcome. A majority of Turks oppose even the limited help their government offered the U.S. during the war, while Kuwaitis largely approve of their government’s support for the military effort.

Opinion about the war is strongly related to perceptions of how the U.S. and its allies conducted the war and are managing its aftermath. In countries opposed to the war, there is a widespread belief the coalition did not try hard enough to avoid civilian casualties. By contrast, solid majorities in most of the coalition countries, as well as Israel, believe the U.S. and its allies did make a serious attempt to spare civilians. Eight-in-ten Americans (82%) feel that way, the highest percentage of any population surveyed.

A somewhat different pattern is apparent in attitudes toward the postwar reconstruction of Iraq. Americans generally believe the allies are taking the needs of the Iraqi people into account. But there is less support for that point of view elsewhere, even in Great Britain, Australia and Israel. Muslim publics generally believe the United States and its allies are doing only a fair or poor job in addressing the needs of the Iraqi people in the postwar reconstruction.

There also is widespread disappointment among Muslims that Iraq did not put up more of a fight against the U.S. and its allies. Overwhelming majorities in Morocco (93%), Jordan (91%), Lebanon (82%), Turkey (82%), Indonesia (82%), and the Palestinian Authority (81%) say they are disappointed the Iraqi military put up so little resistance. Many others around the world share that view, including people in South Korea (58%), Brazil (50%) and Russia (45%).

Still, even in countries that staunchly opposed the war many people believe that Iraqis will be better off now that Saddam Hussein has been removed from power. Solid majorities in Western Europe believe the Iraqi people will be better off, as do eight-in-ten Kuwaitis and half of the Lebanese. But substantial majorities elsewhere, notably in Jordan and the Palestinian Authority, say Iraqis will be
worse off now that Hussein has been deposed.

The postwar update shows limited optimism for a surge of democratic reform in the Middle East. Substantial minorities of Muslims in many countries say the region will become somewhat more democratic, but only in Kuwait do as many as half predict the Middle East will become much more democratic. Expectations of major political changes in the Middle East are modest in countries that participated in the war. Just 16% in Great Britain, 14% in the U.S. and 10% in Australia think that the Middle East will become much more democratic.

U.S. Favors Israel

U.S. policies toward the Middle East come under considerable criticism in the new poll. In 20 of 21 populations surveyed — Americans are the only exception — pluralities or majorities believe the United States favors Israel over the Palestinians too much. This opinion is shared in Israel; 47% of Israelis believe that the U.S. favors Israel too much, while 38% say the policy is fair and 11% think the U.S. favors the Palestinians too much.

But Israel is the only country, aside from the U.S., in which a majority says that U.S. policies lead to more stability in the region. Most Muslim populations think U.S. policies bring less stability to the Middle East, while people elsewhere are divided in their evaluations of the impact of U.S. policies.

More broadly, the postwar survey asked people their views on the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians. By wide margins, most Muslim populations doubt that a way can be found for the state of Israel to exist so that the rights and needs of the Palestinian people are met. Eight-in-ten residents of the Palestinian Authority express this opinion. But Arabs in Israel, who voice the same criticisms of U.S. policy in the Middle East as do other Muslims, generally believe that a way can be found for the state of Israel to exist so that Palestinian rights and needs are addressed. In fact, Arabs in Israel are nearly as likely as Jews to hold that opinion (62% of Arabs, 68% of Jews).

Outside of the Muslim world, there is general agreement that there is a way to ensure Israel’s existence and meet the needs of Palestinians. This view is widely shared in North America and Western Europe.

As people around the world contemplate emerging security threats, countries in the Middle East — Iran and Syria — are viewed as less of a danger than North Korea. Majorities in most countries see North Korea as at least a moderate threat to Asian stability and world peace, while nearly four-in-ten in Australia (39%), the U.S. (38%) and Germany (37%) view North Korea as a great danger. However, just 28% of South Koreans agree that North Korea presents a major threat to regional stability. Israelis have a different sense of potential threats than do people elsewhere. More than half of Israelis (54%) say Iran presents a great threat to the Middle East, twice the proportion in the next closest country (U.S. at 26%).

Democracy Can Work Here

Despite soaring anti-Americanism and substantial support for Osama bin Laden, there is considerable appetite in the Muslim world for democratic freedoms. The broader, 44-nation survey shows that people in Muslim countries place a high value on freedom of expression, freedom of the press, multi-party systems and equal treatment under the law. This includes people living in kingdoms such as Jordan and Kuwait, as well as those in authoritarian states like Uzbekistan and Pakistan. In fact, many of the Muslim publics polled expressed a stronger desire for democratic freedoms than the publics in some nations of Eastern Europe, notably Russia and Bulgaria.

The postwar update finds that in most Muslim populations, large majorities continue to believe that Western-style democracy can work in their countries. This is the case in predominantly Muslim countries like Kuwait (83%) and Bangladesh (57%), but also in religiously diverse countries like Nigeria (75%). There are no substantive differences between Muslims and non-Muslims in Nigeria on this point. Only in Indonesia and Turkey do substantial percentages say democracy is a Western way of doing things that would not work in their countries (53%, 37%). ?

At the same time, most Muslims also support a prominent — and in some cases expanding — role for Islam and religious leaders in the political life of their countries. Yet that opinion does not diminish Muslim support for a system of governance that ensures the same civil liberties and political rights enjoyed by democracies.

In religiously diverse countries, Muslims generally favor keeping religion a private matter at the same rates as non-Muslims. In Nigeria, for example, six-in-ten Muslims and the same proportion of non-Muslims completely agree that religion should be kept separate from government policy. In Lebanon, there are only modest differences on this point between Muslims and non-Muslims.

U.S. Ideals Backed — Mostly

The broad desire for democracy in Muslim countries and elsewhere is but one indication of the global acceptance of ideas and principles espoused by the United States. The major survey also shows that the free market model has been embraced by people almost everywhere, whether in Eastern Europe, sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, or Asia. Majorities in 33 of the 44 nations surveyed feel that people are better off in a free-market economy, even if that leads to disparities in wealth and income. Despite the protests in recent years against globalization and America’s role in fostering it, people are surprisingly accepting of the increased interconnectedness that defines globalization.

This is not to say that they accept democracy and capitalism without qualification, or that they are not concerned about many of the problems of modern life. By and large, however, the people of the world accept the concepts and values that underlie the American approach to governance and business.

Yet there are profound differences in the way Americans and people in other countries — especially Western Europeans — view such fundamental issues as the limits of personal freedom and the role of government in helping the poor. Americans are more individualistic and favor a less compassionate government than do Europeans and others. Nearly two-thirds of Americans (65%) believe success is not outside of their control. Except for Canadians (63%), most of the world disagrees. Among 44 nations surveyed, the U.S. has one of the highest percentages of people who think that most people who fail in life have themselves to blame, rather than society.

Accordingly, Americans care more about personal freedom than government assurances of social justice. Fully 58% of Americans say it is more important to have the freedom to pursue personal goals without government interference, while just 34% say it is more important for government to guarantee that no one is in need. In most other nations, majorities embrace the opposite view. And while most Americans support a social safety net, they are less strongly committed than other peoples to their government taking care of citizens who cannot take care of themselves.

Many Want Democracy, Fewer Have It

People everywhere are united by their desire for honest multiparty elections, freedom of speech and religion and an impartial judiciary. A fair judiciary is seen as especially important; in most countries it is more highly valued than free elections.

Yet there is a widespread sense that these democratic aspirations are not being fulfilled. In Eastern Europe, only in the Czech Republic does a majority (58%) say they have honest, multiparty elections. In Russia and Ukraine, only small minorities feel they have free elections (15% in Russia, 21% in Ukraine). Skepticism about honest elections and freedom of expression are the norm for almost all of the democratizing countries of the world, but this is especially the case in Muslim countries.

Perceptions of repression in some predominantly Muslim countries — notably Turkey and Lebanon — are as widespread as anywhere in the world. Solid majorities in both Turkey and Lebanon say their nations lack several fundamental rights: freedom of speech, a free press, fair elections and an impartial judiciary.

Soviet Hangover

In much of Eastern Europe, there is now greater acceptance of post-communist political changes compared with Pulse of Europe surveys conducted by the then-Times Mirror Center for the People & the Press in 1991, as the Soviet Union was collapsing. Even so, the legacy of communism is apparent in the attitudes of many Eastern European publics. Only about half of those in Ukraine and Russia approve of the political changes that have occurred since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

More generally, Russians and Ukrainians, as well as most other Eastern European publics, say a leader with a “strong hand” could solve national problems better than a democratic government. Only Czechs and Slovaks favor democracy over a strong leader. In most of Latin America and Africa, there is more of a preference for democracy.

There is, however, a large generation gap on views of democracy in Eastern Europe. In most Eastern European countries surveyed, people age 60 and older are much more likely to disapprove of post-communist political changes than are people under the age of 35.

“Yes” to a Smaller World

Beyond their common desire for democracy and free markets, people in emerging nations
also generally acknowledge and accept globalization. People worldwide have become aware of the impact of increasing interconnectedness on their countries and their own lives. Majorities in 41 of 44 countries surveyed say that international trade and business contacts have increased in the past 5 years.

The survey finds broad acceptance of the increasing interconnectedness of the world. Three-quarters or more of those interviewed in almost every country think children need to learn English to succeed in the world today. People generally view the growth in foreign trade, global communication and international popular culture as good for them and their families as well as their countries. For most of the world’s people, however, this approval is guarded. Increased trade and business ties and other changes are viewed as somewhat positive, not very positive.

Despite the widespread support for the globalization process, people around the world think many aspects of their lives — including some affected by globalization — are getting worse. Majorities in 34 of 44 countries surveyed say the availability of good-paying jobs has gotten worse compared with five years ago. They also see the gap between rich and poor, the affordability of health care and the ability to save for one’s old age as getting worse. But people do not blame a more interconnected world for these problems — they mostly point to domestic factors. This is especially true in economically faltering countries in Africa and Latin America, such as Kenya and Argentina.

People around the world are more inclined to credit globalization for conditions they see as improving, such as increased availability of food in stores and more modern medicines and treatments.

While anti-globalization forces have not convinced the public that globalization is the root cause of their economic struggles, the public does share the critics’ concerns about eroding national sovereignty and a loss of cultural identity. Large majorities in 42 of 44 countries believe that their traditional way of life is getting lost and most people feel that their way of life has to be protected against foreign influence. There is less agreement that consumerism and commercialism represent a threat to one’s culture. However, that point of view is prevalent in Western Europe and Latin America.

The polling finds, however, that the idea of “global” forces is something of a red flag to people around the world. “Global economy” is seen as more threatening than “trade with other countries.” People worry about the impact of global trade on themselves and their families even though they believe that global trade is probably a good thing for their country as a whole.

Globalization Foes Fail to Get Through

People around the world generally have a positive view of the symbols of globalization. Large corporations from other countries get a favorable review in much of the world, as do international organizations.

In Africa, people express highly favorable opinions of foreign corporations, while the Middle East is more divided. Dislike of foreign firms is mostly limited to people in the major advanced economies of Western Europe, the U.S. and Canada. Even in these countries, however, positive evaluations of multinationals outweigh negative assessments.

Similarly, the impact of international financial organizations such as the World Bank, the IMF and the World Trade Organization is seen as much more positive than negative in most parts of the world. This is overwhelmingly the case in Africa. Argentina, Brazil, Jordan and Turkey stand out for their highly critical view of these institutions.
In contrast, people generally have a negative view of anti-globalization protesters. The French give higher ratings to multinational corporations than to the protesters. And in Italy, site of a major clash in 2001 between police and anti-globalization forces in Genoa, the public by nearly two-to-one (51%-27%) says the protesters are having a bad influence on the country. It should be noted that majorities in many countries declined to give an opinion of anti-globalization protesters. This is mostly the case in developing countries, but also in more advanced nations like South Korea (61%) and Japan (55%).

But “Foreign” Still a Negative

Most people in the world feel their way of life needs protection from foreign influence, and majorities in nearly every country surveyed favor tougher restrictions on people entering their countries. Overwhelming majorities in the Western European countries surveyed support tighter borders. In fact, Western Europeans expressed as much support for such restrictions as they did in the Pulse of Europe survey 12 years ago, when Europe was less unified. Eastern Europeans also have become much more wary of porous borders than when the Cold War was ending, a time when many people were more concerned with getting out of their countries than with keeping others from getting in.

In that context, Western Europeans take a much dimmer view of foreign workers from Eastern Europe, as well as the Middle East and North Africa, than they do of foreign workers from other European Union countries. This is especially the case in Germany, where 59% say Middle Easterners and North Africans who come to work in Germany are bad for the country; 53% say that about foreign workers from Eastern Europe.

This European concern about foreign influence and sovereignty also is seen in other ways. There are still sizable minorities of people in Great Britain, France, Germany and Italy who think that there are parts of other countries that really belong to them. This sentiment has not diminished — and in some cases has risen dramatically — since the end of the Cold War. Fully 63% of Russians believe that “there are parts of neighboring countries that really belong to Russia.” In 1991, just 22% agreed with that statement. Broad majorities in the Philippines, India, Lebanon, South Africa, Pakistan, Nigeria, South Korea and Turkey also feel that parts of other nations rightfully belong to their country.

As was the case in 1991, the American public has a more favorable view of ethnic and racial minorities than do Western European publics. African Americans and Hispanics are viewed much more positively in the U.S. than are Turks in Germany, North Africans in France, and Albanians in Italy.

Modern Times

People around the world are struggling with some elements of modern life, while easily accepting others. Many people say that they do not like the pace of modern life. Yet they broadly endorse the things that make life go fast, especially cell phones and the Internet.

There is significant opposition to modern commercial culture in advanced countries, where opinions about the pace of life and such modern conveniences as fast food and television are more mixed than they are in the developing world. Western Europeans and Latin Americans are most likely to express the view that commercialism represents a threat to their cultures.

Underscoring the conflicted views many people have of the modern world, people in Africa are the most likely to express the concern that their traditional way of life is being lost. Yet they also are the most enthusiastic about modern conveniences and fast food.

There also is a significant global generation gap on views of modern life. Younger and better-educated people are more comfortable with the pace of modern life. Younger people also have a better opinion of fast food and television than do their elders.

Globally, people have a broadly favorable view of birth control and family planning, with the notable exception of populations in aging industrial nations, such as Italy, Japan and Germany. Only about three-in-ten Japanese (32%) and fewer than half in Italy and Germany (41%, 47%, respectively), view birth control as a positive change. In most of the developing nations of Africa and Asia, 70% or more say birth control and family planning have changed things for the better.

Divided Over Religion, Homosexuality

Homosexuality and the centrality of religion to personal morality divide the peoples of the world. Majorities in most countries say it is necessary to believe in God to be a moral person. But Canadians and Europeans — both in the West and the East — take the secular view that it is possible to be moral without believing in God. Opinion in the United States is closer to that in most developing countries, where agreement is nearly universal that personal morality is linked to belief in God.

Acceptance of homosexuality divides the publics of the world in a similar way. People in Africa and the Middle East strongly object to societal acceptance of homosexuality. But there is far greater tolerance for homosexuality in major Latin American countries such as Mexico, Argentina, Bolivia and Brazil. Opinion in Europe is split between West and East. Majorities in every Western European nation surveyed say homosexuality should be accepted by society, while most Russians, Poles and Ukrainians disagree. Americans are divided — a thin majority (51%) believes homosexuality should be accepted, while 42% disagree.

Women’s increasing role in the workplace is broadly supported around the world. Large majorities in 41 of 44 countries believe the more satisfying way of life is when both spouses work and share the burdens of childcare. Pakistan, Egypt and Jordan are the only countries in which majorities believe it is better for women to stay home and take care of the children while the husband provides for the family.

As religion plays a more prominent role in public life, sharp divisions of opinion about the mixing of church and state are apparent. Most notably, while the public expresses strong support for the idea of faith-based groups receiving government funding to provide social services, in practice, it has many reservations. Most Americans would not extend that right to non-Judeo-Christian religious groups including: Muslim Americans, Buddhist Americans, Nation of Islam and the Church of Scientology. Many also have reservations about allowing the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — the Mormons — to apply for federal funding to offer social services.

Beyond which religions are acceptable, strong concerns are expressed about what government might do to religion and what religious groups might do to the people they are trying to help. On the one hand, fully 68% worry that faith- based initiatives might lead to too much government involvement with religious organizations. On the other, six-in-ten express concerns that religious groups would proselytize among recipients of social services, and about the same percentage would prohibit groups that encourage religious conversion from receiving government funds. Americans have an even bigger problem with government-funded religious organizations hiring only those people who share their beliefs — 78% oppose that concept.

The survey also determined that attitudes toward faith-based funding have become more politicized. Since last year, Republicans have become more approving of faith-based initiatives, while Democrats have become somewhat less enthusiastic. In that same vein, a Pew survey taken in February found the public was divided over the creation of a White House office to enlarge the role that religious organizations play in providing social services, even though 64% of respondents in that same poll favored funding for faith-based organizations. ( See “Bush Approval on Par,” Feb. 22, 2001.)

While this issue has become more partisan, there also is considerable disagreement within the two political parties. On the Republican side, white evangelicals are more enthusiastic than other conservatives and moderate Republicans. Among Democrats, a bare majority of white liberals favor the idea, while black Democrats embrace it as strongly as Republican evangelicals.¹

Still, many Americans find arguments in favor of faith-based funding to be compelling, and a strong majority acknowledges the contributions churches, synagogues and other religious groups make to society. Nearly three-quarters (72%) cite the care and compassion of religious workers as an important reason for supporting the concept of faith-based groups receiving government funding. This reflects a public recognition of the strong connection between religious practice and social service. Three-quarters think that churches and other houses of worship contribute significantly to solving America’s social problems. In fact, the survey shows that people with strong religious commitment are three times as likely as those with little or no belief to regularly volunteer to help needy people.²

Yet the public also makes clear distinctions as to the potential strengths and weaknesses of specific church-based social services. There is a general consensus that government agencies would be better than religious organizations and secular community groups at literacy training, providing health care and job training. By contrast, the public has more faith in religious organizations than other types of agencies to feed the homeless and counsel prisoners. The sharpest divides are over which groups could do a better job of mentoring young people, counseling teens about pregnancy, and treating drug addiction. White evangelicals and black Protestants tend to prefer religious groups for these purposes, while white mainline Protestants and Catholics think secular, community-based efforts would be more effective.

The nation’s divisions over religion and its role in contemporary life go deeper than disagreements over implementing faith-based plans. The public generally holds negative views of atheists and only lukewarm opinions of non-Judeo-Christian Americans. For the most part, these potential tensions remain below the surface as very few Americans say they are bothered by an increasing number of non-Christians and seculars in American society. The public is more openly frustrated with the news and entertainment industries. This is particularly true among highly religious Americans, majorities of whom believe that people of their faith are not treated fairly by the media and Hollywood.

At the same time, many Americans — especially the less religious — are often hesitant to see churches offer opinions on social and political matters, and nearly two-thirds express reservations about the clergy speaking out on partisan politics or issues.

The survey found a surprisingly sharp generational pattern in views about the role religion plays in politics and the possibility of a narrowing divide between church and state. Older people, especially those age 65 and above, are much more worried than younger people about the blurring of these lines. Most seniors do not think it is a good idea for churches to speak out on social and political questions, let alone for the clergy to engage in political advocacy from the pulpit. Older people are also far less enthusiastic than younger people about faith-based initiatives generally, as they worry more about threats to the separation between church and state.

For the most part, those with strong religious beliefs are politically conservative. Republicans outnumber Democrats two-to-one among white evangelical Protestants. While black evangelicals are overwhelmingly Democratic, they tend to hold conservative social attitudes. Americans point to their religious beliefs as a major influence in attitudes toward some of the most contentious social issues of the day. These beliefs generally shape a more conservative point of view — opposition to gay marriages, assisted suicides, and unrestricted research on human cloning. But, there are some liberal effects as well. Many of the growing number of opponents of the death penalty cite the influence of religion in determining their position on this issue.

These are among the most important findings of the joint study by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and the Pew Research Center For The People & The Press. It was conducted among 2,041 adults, including an oversample of African-Americans, March 5-18.

Other Findings

• The Christian conservative movement and the entertainment industry — two groups often at odds with each other — earn relatively modest ratings from the public. Christian conservatives get a 58% favorable to 42% unfavorable rating, and the entertainment industry earns a 53% favorable to 47% unfavorable rating.
• The public continues to overwhelmingly oppose unrestricted research into human cloning. Eight-in-ten oppose this research while just 13% support it. Religious beliefs are cited as a basis for this opinion most often.
• About half of Americans at least sometimes watch religious television or listen to religious radio programming. Only a third (34%) say they never tune into such broadcasts.
• Nearly four-in-ten Americans (37%) say they have not heard of Episcopalians or could not evaluate them — far more than the number who could not rate Methodists (19%), Presbyterians (24%) or Lutherans (25%).
• When asked, people most often describe God in terms of “power and might” (38%), but as many as 25% point to what God does or provides for them.

This report is divided into five Sections. In Section I we look at opinions on the role religion plays in solving society’s problems and attitudes toward government funding for faith-based groups. Section II examines views on religious diversity and includes the public’s ratings of various religious groups. That is followed by an analysis, in Section III, of the influence of religious belief on attitudes toward policy issues. Sections IV and V cover the nation’s religious landscape, examining practices and beliefs, as well as impressions of God.