logo
Majority of US adults support religious chaplains in public schools, a new AP-NORC poll shows

Majority of US adults support religious chaplains in public schools, a new AP-NORC poll shows

WASHINGTON (AP) — Few U.S. adults support allowing religious schools to become tax-funded public charter schools, but a majority favors allowing religious chaplains to provide support services for public school students, a new poll finds.
The survey from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research shows the complexity of Americans' attitudes toward religious expression in schools, which varies depending on the kind of expression and sometimes crosses partisan lines.
The findings also highlight tension points in the country's long-standing debate over the role of religion in public schools, which continues to drive legislation and legal action. Recent examples include a lawsuit against a new Arkansas measure that requires the display of the Ten Commandments in classrooms, a push by lawmakers in multiple states to allow religious chaplains to serve in student support roles in public schools, and the U.S. Supreme Court's 4-4 decision that blocked plans for a publicly funded Catholic charter school in Oklahoma.
On some issues like teacher-led prayer, white evangelical Protestants and Black Protestants — who traditionally find themselves on opposite sides of the political aisle — are both largely supportive, dividing them from other religious groups. White evangelical Protestants are more likely than many other religious groups to say religion has 'too little' influence on what children are taught in public schools.
Chaplains in schools are popular, but not teacher prayer
About 6 in 10 U.S. adults say that religious chaplains should be allowed to provide support services for students in public schools, but most do not think teacher-led prayer or a mandatory period during school hours for private prayer should be allowed in public schools.
Texas became the first state to allow chaplains, in 2023. After that, lawmakers in several states considered similar bills. It's illustrative of an ongoing conservative push to bring more religion into the classroom, which advocates of church-state separation are countering.
Sally Hacker, 61, a Republican and nondenominational Christian from Michigan, supports having chaplains in schools. They could help students use the Bible as a moral guide, she said.
'If they have problems, these students could go and talk to these preachers and these chaplains, and maybe they could help them figure out a way to get out of those problems,' Hacker said.
School chaplains are only somewhat divisive among religious Americans, although they're still opposed by a majority of nones, the term for atheists, agnostics and those with no religion in particular. But white evangelical Protestants and Black Protestants stand apart from Catholics, white mainline Protestants and nones in their support for teacher prayer and mandatory prayer periods in public schools.
For public schoolteacher Cameron Thompson, 47, of Ohio, teacher-led prayer is not OK if it's part of classroom instruction, but he doesn't see an issue if teachers choose to lead students in prayer as part of an extracurricular activity, like a Fellowship of Christian Athletes event.
'As an optional activity, I feel like it is something that, yeah, it should be allowed for sure,' said Thompson, a Republican and a Lutheran.
The questions exposed fault lines among partisans on both sides of the political spectrum. Democrats are firmly opposed to teacher-led prayer and mandatory school prayer periods but divided on chaplain support services in public schools, while Republicans are firmly in favor of chaplain support services and teacher-led prayer but divided on a mandatory school prayer period.
Public school psychologist Gary Leu, 64, of Utah, believes adding chaplains is misguided.
Leu, a Democrat, questions the motives behind it, wondering if chaplain programs are more about giving religious watchdogs access to schools or have some other agenda. He also is concerned about what, if any, professional standards and ethics the chaplains would be held to.
'I don't know what you're trying to accomplish that isn't already being accomplished,' said Leu, who is not affiliated with a particular religion but has a background in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Opposition to tax-funded religious charter schools, but more openness to vouchers
Americans are more likely to oppose allowing religious schools to become tax-funded public charter schools than to favor this. About 4 in 10 are opposed, while roughly one-quarter are in favor and about one-third are neither in favor nor opposed.
In general, U.S. adults are more divided on tax-funded vouchers that help parents pay for tuition for their children to attend private or religious schools of their choice instead of public schools. Similar shares oppose and favor this; about one-quarter are neutral.
In May, the Supreme Court's tie decision effectively ended what would have been the nation's first religious charter school, but it left the issue unresolved nationally.
There isn't majority support for allowing religious schools to become tax-funded public charter schools among any of the major religious groups analyzed, although about 4 in 10 white evangelical Protestants are in favor, compared with about 3 in 10 Catholics and Black Protestants and about 2 in 10 white mainline Protestants. Substantial shares of all of these groups neither favor nor oppose this idea. Most nones oppose allowing religious schools to become tax-funded public charter schools.
Jess Tichenor, 39, of Oregon, is among the nones who strongly oppose tax-funded religious charter schools as she is wary of favoritism for Christianity.
'In an ideal situation, the publicly funded schools would be a safe place for any religion to be recognized or even practiced,' said Tichenor, who practices Buddhism. She feels similarly about school vouchers.
Against the backdrop of favorable decisions by the conservative-majority Supreme Court, several states have expanded school voucher programs in recent years.
Supporters say these programs help families make the best choice for their children's education. At the Republican National Convention, Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee called it the 'civil rights issue of our time.' Tennessee expanded its school voucher program in February.
Besides discrimination concerns and church-state issues, opponents worry that school vouchers take money from public schools, which serve most U.S. students, and benefit higher-income families that already use private schools.
'If they're going to end up sending their kids to a special private school, they need to fund that out of their own pocket,' said Hacker, the nondenominational Christian from Michigan.
Other views on religion and public schools
__ About 3 in 10 U.S. adults say religion has 'too much' influence on what children are taught in public school. About two-thirds of white evangelical Protestants say religion has 'too little' influence.
__ About half of Americans favor requiring public schools to provide parents with lists of books that are available to students, while about one-third neither favor nor oppose this and 14% are opposed.
__ Nearly half, 45%, of U.S. adults oppose religious exemptions for childhood vaccines that are required for students attending public schools, while roughly one-quarter are in favor and about 3 in 10 are neutral.
__ Most adults say freedom of religion and church-state separation are 'extremely' or 'very' important to the United States' identity as a nation, but 81% say religious freedom is important, compared with 64% who say this about separation of church and state.
___
Meyer reported from Nashville, Tenn.
___
Associated Press religion coverage receives support through the AP's collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content.
The AP-NORC poll of 1,158 adults was conducted June 5-9, using a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Gallup: American pride falls to record low
Gallup: American pride falls to record low

UPI

time38 minutes ago

  • UPI

Gallup: American pride falls to record low

The percentage of Americans who say they are 'proud to be an American' is down nine percent from last year, a recent study shows. File Photo by Ken Cedeno/UPI | License Photo June 30 (UPI) -- The percentage of Americans who say they are "proud to be an American" has fallen to a record low, according to a Gallup poll released Monday. The poll found that 58% of U.S. respondents said they were "extremely (41%) or very proud (17%) " to be an American this year. The "extremely proud" Americans have not been shown a massive difference from prior years, 2022 (38%) and (39%) in 2023. The change is mostly in the "very proud" percentile. An additional 19% of respondents said they were "moderately" proud, while 11% said they were "only a little" and 9% "not at all" proud. In 2018, 10% of U.S. adults said they had little or no national pride. In January 2001, when Americans were first asked how proud they were, 87% said extremely or very proud. After the terrorist attacks of 9/11, this increased to 90% and it was at that level between 2002 and 2004. The percentage of American pride was higher than 80% until 2017, when 75% said they were proud and it has since then deteriorated. The Democratic party has seen the biggest drop in pride this year going from 62% to 36%. While the Republicans' national pride has typically stayed above 90%. Generation Z and millennials are the most distinct in pride between generations. Generation Z is at 41%, while millennials are at 58%. Generation X is 71%, the baby boom generation is 75% and 83% of the Silent Generation. According to this study, Generation Z and millennials are much less proud of their country than their elders. These changes seem to have occurred during "economic prospects for young people, widespread dissatisfaction with the state of the nation, greater ideological divides between the parties, unfavorable images of both parties and intense partisan rancor during the Trump and Biden administrations." The survey was conducted from June 2-19 before the United States launched strikes on Iran on June 21. It was conducted with

Supreme Court takes up a Republican appeal to end limits on party spending in federal elections
Supreme Court takes up a Republican appeal to end limits on party spending in federal elections

The Hill

time42 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Supreme Court takes up a Republican appeal to end limits on party spending in federal elections

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court will take up a Republican-led drive, backed by President Donald Trump's administration, to wipe away limits on how much political parties can spend in coordination with candidates for Congress and president. The justices said Monday they will review an appellate ruling that upheld a provision of federal election law that is more than 50 years old, ignoring pleas from Democrats to leave the law in place. The Supreme Court itself upheld it in 2001. But since Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court in 2005, a conservative majority has upended a variety of congressionally enacted limits on raising and spending money to influence elections. The court's 2010 Citizens United decision opened the door to unlimited independent spending in federal elections. Without the limits on party spending, large donors would be able to skirt caps on individual contributions to a candidate by directing unlimited sums to the party with the understanding that the money will be spent on behalf of the candidate, supporters of the law say. The case will be argued in the fall. Richard Hasen, an election law expert at the University of California at Los Angeles law school, has predicted the court will strike down the limits. 'That may even make sense now in light of the prevalence of super PAC spending that has undermined political parties and done nothing to limit (and in fact increased) corruption and inequality,' Hasen wrote on the Election Law blog. The Justice Department almost always defends federal laws when they are challenged in court. But the Trump administration notified the court that 'this is the rare case that warrants an exception to that general approach' because it believes the law violates free-speech protections in the First Amendment. The Republican committees for House and Senate candidates filed the lawsuit in Ohio in 2022, joined by two Ohio Republicans in Congress, then-Sen. J.D. Vance, who's now vice president, and then-Rep. Steve Chabot. In 2025, the coordinated party spending for Senate races ranges from $127,200 in several states with small populations to nearly $4 million in California. For House races, the limits are $127,200 in states with only one representative and $63,600 everywhere else. The court also agreed to referee a fight between internet service provider Cox Communications and record labels over illegal music downloads by Cox customers. The justices will review a lower-court ruling in a lawsuit led by Sony Music Entertainment that Cox has to cut off customers who downloaded music they didn't pay for or face liability for any future acts of digital piracy. A jury had initially found Cox liable for more than $1 billion, but the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals threw out the award. The high court rejected the record labels' appeal of that aspect of the ruling. ___ Follow the AP's coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at

Glastonbury mixed pop and politics long before the Bob Vylan controversy
Glastonbury mixed pop and politics long before the Bob Vylan controversy

San Francisco Chronicle​

timean hour ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

Glastonbury mixed pop and politics long before the Bob Vylan controversy

LONDON (AP) — The Glastonbury Festival is making headlines for controversy rather than music. The likes of Olivia Rodrigo, Rod Stewart, Neil Young, Charli XCX, Busta Rhymes and Doechii played to tens of thousands onsite, and millions more on TV, during Britain's biggest and most famous music extravaganza. But it's little-known rap-punk duo Bob Vylan attracting politicians' ire — and a police probe — after leading a chant calling for 'death' to the Israeli military. This isn't the first time politics has collided with pop at the festival. For half a century, Britain's big political and cultural divides have found their way onstage at Glastonbury. Glastonbury grew from the counterculture The Glastonbury Festival of Contemporary Performing Arts, to give it its full name, was founded by Michael Eavis in 1970 on his Worthy Farm, 120 miles (some 200 kilometers) southwest of London. It's still run by the 90-year-old farmer and his daughter, Emily Eavis. Originally a hippie happening with a 1 pound ticket price (about 20 pounds or $27 today), Glastonbury has largely shed its counterculture cachet. These days, tickets for the three-day event cost close to 400 pounds. But it remains famous for its eclectic lineup, unique atmosphere and commitment to environmentalism and other progressive causes. This year's event drew about 200,000 people to see almost 4,000 performers on 120 stages, alongside film screenings and live debates on a variety of issues. The festival has always had a political side Glastonbury was founded in a spirit of hippie idealism that has never entirely faded. In the 1980s, the festival donated some of its profits to the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, which protested U.S. nuclear weapons on British soil. It continues to support charities including Oxfam and Greenpeace. By the late 1980s, attendees included New Age 'travelers' involved with the U.K.'s unofficial and anarchic rave scene. In 1990, some travelers clashed with security at the site, leading to significant damage and more than 200 arrests. Since then, the festival's security and organization have grown increasingly professional, sparking regret from some fans who feel it has lost its alternative spirit. The 2016 festival coincided with the U.K.'s referendum on European Union membership, and the decision to leave the bloc — which most young people opposed — overshadowed the event. Many performers mentioned Brexit and the dispirited mood, including headliner Adele, who urged people to 'look after each other.' Performers have often vented their opposition to politicians from the stage. In 2019, rapper Stormzy led the crowd in 'F___ Boris' chants aimed at then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson. This year, Irish rappers Kneecap directed the same expletive at Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Israel's war against Hamas in Gaza has provoked heightened emotions that spilled over onto Glastonbury's stages. Before the event, some politicians called for Glastonbury to cancel a performance by Irish-language hip-hop trio Kneecap, whose pro-Palestinian comments, critics say, have crossed a line into support for violence. Kneecap member Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh has been charged under the Terrorism Act with supporting a proscribed organization for allegedly waving a Hezbollah flag at a concert in London in November. He denies the charge, and Kneecap has accused critics of trying to silence the band because of its support for the Palestinian cause. Kneecap's energetic set included plenty of pro-Palestinian comments and criticism of the government. But it was the act that preceded them, Bob Vylan, that caused a furor when a member of the duo led chants of 'death to the IDF,' the Israel Defense Forces. The Avon and Somerset Police force said officers would review video evidence 'to determine whether any offenses may have been committed that would require a criminal investigation. Michael and Emily Eavis said Bob Vylan had 'very much crossed a line.' They said 'there is no place at Glastonbury for antisemitism, hate speech or incitement to violence.' The BBC is facing criticism Britain's publicly funded national broadcaster is under fire for showing Bob Vylan's set, one of dozens of Glastonbury performances it streamed live online. The BBC said Monday that it should have cut off the broadcast after the 'antisemitic' and 'utterly unacceptable' comments, and has removed the performance from its website. But the government is demanding to know what 'due diligence' it did on Bob Vylan before the broadcast. Some media experts say the broadcaster is in a difficult position. Steven Barnett, professor of communications at the University of Westminster, said Britain's influential right-wing press,' including newspapers such as the Daily Mail and The Sun, frequently attack the BBC, 'for both commercial and ideological reasons.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store