Because previously proven, the data collected was graphically represented to be able to highlight developments or flaws. Figure 1 (Fig.
1) begins by showing that 36% of our sample recognized same love-making marriage, whilst 64% would not. Since non-support of same-sex marriage is used as our indicator of homophobia, approximately two-thirds (( 2)? (3 )) of the sample is known as homophobic. Whilst this shows that a substantial amount of our human population is encouraging of homosexuality, the majority is usually apparently homophobic. Thus, a standard was identified, against which will individual components of the population then can be manipulated and analysed in a positivistic strategy.
Figure 2 shows that the gender in the non-supportive population was almost equally allocated, which suggests that perspective is definitely gender neutral. This is unexpected considering that sexuality commonly indicates differing viewpoints, but will be attributed to the existence of homosexuality in both sexes. Additionally , this is reflected in Fig several. where the man only college, Naparima University is proportionately equal to the female only schools, Naparima Girls’ High School (NGHS), ASJA Girls’ College (ASJA) and St . Joseph’s Convent (SJC).
Furthermore, Figure some shows that the standard CSEC grades (which all of us will use since an sign of education level) from the supporters roughly equalled that of the non-supporters. Therefore , nor gender, education level school has significant effect on our candidates’ belief of homosexual marriage. Continuing the hunt for factors that may affect the advancement homophobia, Fig 5 traces four further more dimensions of social life, showing that, support from the legalisation of marijuana, drinking habits, good altercations with the law, and family composition all got negligible results because the proportions only a little bit deviated through the norm. It is just when the powerful of religion is introduced that anomalies become apparent.
As illustrated in Figure six, there is little variance involving the individual made use of, with Islam being marginally more homophobic, but , once religion is usually removed, as with the case of our secular individuals, the ratios are corrected and about two-thirds (( 2)? (3 )) of the secular applicants were supporting. Additionally , it had been observed that, whilst Muslim candidates had the highest relationship to homophobia within our sample, the applicants from the Islamic school, ASJA Girls’ University who may have been exposed to the institution for at least five years, a substantial part of their lives-, had the cheapest correlation to homophobia; the being approximately 10%.
This can be pertinent because it is also indicative of secularisation by differentiation wherein the nonreligious world of existence, education is usually separated via religion (Jose Casanova, 1994). In the two instances of secularisation, homophobia was reduced. Building on the analysis of the effect of religion, religiosity was then simply compared to opinion using three common steps of religiosity. Figure several shows the relationship between rate of recurrence of visitation of host to worship and nonsupport, Determine 8 shows the regularity of private worship against nonsupport and Number 8 reveals the regularity of private study of religious texts versus non-support.
All graphs yielded an optimistic gradient, commenced well below the average and ended well above this. This indicates, that as religiosity increases, also does homophobia. This contrasts our prior observation that there were simply no trends amongst the various religions but verifies the inference that secularisation decreases homophobia.
Careful consideration in the qualitative data compounds these assertions because, not only is definitely religion freely and usually applied as justification of homophobia, the prospects who were most fervently spiritual and enmeshed with their members were generally most blatantly homophobic. In addition , if the look at of the spiritual leaders is to be taken as the consensus in the congregation, apparently most rationalize discrimination. Nevertheless , there were situations in which the fervently religious strongly suggested positively for same-sex marriages.
The phenomena observed can be explained utilizing a functionalist point of view in which religion serves as a procedure for maintaining cultural order through increasing unification within a mostly heterosexual populace by segregating the gay, thereby offering a common enemy, ‘ and instilling some values and norms in society. Likewise, religion may be viewed as motivating more productive marriages in which childbirth is possible, thereby assisting to sustain the birth-rate, attempting to aid the device of the relatives. When candidates are separated from the capabilities of religion, they are more likely to keep a different collection or norms, wherein homosexuals are corresponding to heterosexuals.
Contrastingly, a Turmoil perspective may be used in hich religion serves to rationalize the construction of the class contemporary society in which the heterosexuals are the bourgeoisie’ and the homosexuals are the proletariat. ‘ By masking the inspiration of electricity and fermage in work ruling, the heterosexuals should legitimize their particular position of superiority. When this false impression is taken off and course consciousness attained, as in the situation of high-end candidates and candidates with little religiosity, the bourgeoisie can no longer legitimize their position, and so homophobia is reduced.
Alternatively, if one is to make use of Weber’s theory of Logical Choice, one particular might advise, that, most likely candidates chose to follow the homophobic direction with their religious market leaders, rationalizing that earning the support of the entire members was worth discriminating against a fraction. This theory also provides to explain how come candidates recognized same-sex relationship, because the applicable justification was a rationalisation that their (homosexuals) private your life did not have an effect on me (the candidate) negatively and was therefore not a problem. This as well explains the anomaly of the few prospects who were enmeshed in non-supportive congregations but nonetheless supported same-sex marriages.
Carrying on the interpretivistic trend, Mead’s theory of Symbolic Interactionism may be applied in which the attributed meanings of symbols motivate homophobia. For example , candidates who have studied their very own holy text messages daily were most likely to be non-supportive. They may assign, that the text determines their very own values and the text would not support homosexuality, therefore , that they, identified as a follower of the text, would not support homosexuality.
Another case in point may be the make use of song referrals in their justification, wherein, candidates interpret the music to disapprove of homophobia and therefore, while listeners, they must also brand. Lastly, the usage of homophobic slurs such as fag’ in the dialect of the non-supporters suggests that homosexuality is unwanted, and communicates this to others who may interpret this as such, and develop the same opinion. Discussion of Findings In, Invitation towards the sociology of religion, Zuckerman gives a functionalist approach through which we see how religion may affect sociable hange.
He demonstrates a correlation among a decrease in the influence of religion and an increase in the acceptance of homosexual relations suggesting that religion does indeed impact homophobia while determined coming from my research. Furthermore, this individual considered another form of discrimination, that is, racism in which again, religion led to the segregation of a fraction, but as well, where faith provided a powerful community through which resistance could grow. The strength and effect of these churches echoes the observation the fact that more enmeshed our subject matter were inside their religious congregations, the more homophobic they tended to be.
Building for the methods by which religion could affect interpersonal life, the article, Gays bash government on same-sex marriage, presents a scenario in which religion has clearly moulded the opinion of a prominent person in our authorities to the stage that it over-rode proper carry out. This crass act seems less astonishing when it is discovered that several candidates also paraphrased or quoted biblical passages in lieu of an explanation. The investigation paper, Religion and public opinion of same-sex matrimony, also adds acceptance to our research because their very own results were noticeably similar to our. They learned, as I did, that a persons’ religiosity but not their specific religion was the prominent aspect in influencing all their view of same-sex marriage.
Additionally , the article entitled, J-FLAG Issues Statement on International Day Against Homophobia, also certifies this bottom line by using stats which demonstrated that 56% believed homosexuality and Christianity were incompatible and that 82% believed it turned out immoral. This kind of, second examine was done in Jamacia and as such, it is also more highly relevant to our study based in Trinidad; it should be met with no surprise that their sample yielded a homophobic price only slightly lower than our very own at 59% as opposed to 64%.
Finally, with regards to our final aim, the study paper, Religion and general public opinion of same-sex relationship, also proves helpful because that they validate that no various other standard market holds significant influence on a candidate’s thoughts and opinions of same-sex marriage besides religiosity. Considering these findings, my primary finding seems to be that faith does, actually play a tremendous role in developing homophobia within the Lower Six population of San Fernando.
Additionally , three key inferences may be made: First of all, that religious beliefs may develop homophobia by presenting a residential area in which homophobia may be validated and advertised as the norm, through interaction with the organization of government, or through emblematic interaction in which the spiritual texts are interpreted since encouraging homophobia. Secondly, that religiosity can be described as much more significant factor than religious affiliation in producing homophobia, with religious affiliation being almost powerless inside our study.
Thirdly, we may infer that, even though exposure to the media would have some impact on the development of homophobia as mirrored in our qualitative data, essentially, religion may be the major impact with no significant alternative elements appearing within our study.? Limitations Whilst doing my research, certain constraints were faced. Chief amongst these was the cost effectiveness of conducting this sort of a relatively considerable survey composed of over 200 subjects. Contributing to this difficulty was the record analysis in which a spreadsheet was necessary.
In addition , in order to stability the ratio of men to feminine respondents, the strata of Naparima School was over-represented since that was the institution in which the many co-operation was met. Yet , since Naparima College proved to be a typical company, for the purposes of the study, I believe that the honesty of the info was no jeopardized. Difficulty was also achieved in collecting and analysing secondary info sources because inquisitions by our public libraries proven fruitless and a lot of of the latest, relevant study papers posted were both costly, or restricted to users of selected institutions.
Lastly, there could have been some, inherent instrument tendency in my research of the qualitative data. Tips about completion of my research, particular recommendations have become apparent. The first being that a complete separation of the house of worship and state must be accomplished in order to provide the allocation of same-sex marriages, and the second being that the institution of faith should be taken out of society since it, in its many forms may a dangerous device for uplifting discrimination.
Conclusion Although it has been a lengthy highway, it was an aligned one, and, in summation, we can decide that there is certainly a clear marriage between religious beliefs and homophobia in which faith inspires the other through various ways. Furthermore, a person’s religiosity was shown to be the determining take into account influencing homophobia with no different influence being significant.?
