International Journal of Public Opinion Research Vol. 26 No.

3 2014
ß The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The World Association
for Public Opinion Research. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1093/ijpor/edu003 Advance Access publication 12 February 2014

RESEARCH NOTE

Employment Discrimination, Local School Boards,

and LGBT Civil Rights: Reviewing 25 Years of
Public Opinion Data

Downloaded from http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/ at Carleton University on June 23, 2015

Amy B. Becker
Department of Communication, Loyola University Maryland, 4501 N. Charles Street,
Baltimore, MD 21210, USA

Over the past few decades, scholars from a variety of disciplines have devoted consid-
erable attention toward studying evolving public attitudes toward a whole range of
LGBT civil rights issues including support for open service in the military, same-sex
parent adoption, employment non-discrimination, civil unions, and marriage equality. In
the last 10 years in particular, the emphasis has shifted toward studying the various
factors that best explain variation in support for same-sex marriage including demo-
graphic considerations, religious and ideological predispositions, attitudes toward
marriage and family, and social contact (Baunach, 2011, 2012; Becker, 2012a, 2012b;
Becker & Scheufele, 2009, 2011; Becker & Todd, 2013; Brewer, 2008; Brewer & Wilcox,
2005; Lewis, 2005, 2011; Lewis & Gossett, 2008; Lewis & Oh, 2008). Interest in docu-
menting what some have deemed ‘‘a sea change in public opinion’’ toward same-sex
marriage has prevailed, leaving concerns about employment discrimination, military service,
and other civil rights issues behind as vestiges of a bygone era. A corresponding, almost
exclusive focus on efforts to legalize same-sex marriage at both the federal and state levels has
dominated the activities of issue advocacy, legal, and grassroots organizations.
In truth, these other LGBT civil rights issues that have been eclipsed by the
singular focus on same-sex marriage remain important legal ‘‘matters.’’ For example,
employment discrimination has actually long been a relevant LGBT civil rights
concern, first attracting considerable attention in the 1970s and 1980s given efforts
by Anita Bryant and others to strike down anti-discrimination laws at the state-level
through grassroots activism campaigns (Brewer, 2008). At present writing, 29 US
states still allow individuals to be fired because of their sexual orientation (Dowd,
2013). While the U.S. Senate recently voted in November of 2013 to support extend-
ing the Employment Nondiscrimination Act to protect gay, lesbian, bisexual, and

All correspondence regarding this manuscript should be addressed to Amy B. Becker, at Department
of Communication, Loyola University Maryland, 4501 N. Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21210, USA.
E-mail: abbecker@loyola.edu
 RESEARCH NOTE 343
transgender individuals, it is predicted that the same level of bipartisan support will
not be forthcoming from members of the U.S. House of Representatives, therefore
stalling the legislation (the U.S. Senate vote was 64 to 32 with 10 Republicans voting
for the bill; Peters, 2013). This legal reality, the rise in documented hate crimes, and
growing public controversies—including whether to allow gay men to accept leader-
ship positions within the Boy Scouts of America—suggest that it may be time for
scholars to revisit the issue of employment non-discrimination in order to better
understand the still very real implications for members of the LGBT community
and the evolving state of public opinion toward other relevant civil rights concerns
in addition to marriage equality (Herek, 2009; Johnson, 2013).
As such, the current research examines 25 years of public opinion data collected by
the Pew Research Center’s Social and Demographic Trends Project in an effort to take

Downloaded from http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/ at Carleton University on June 23, 2015

a closer look at public attitudes toward employment discrimination. Specifically, the
present study examines shifting patterns of public support for giving school boards the
authority to fire teachers who are known homosexuals between 1987–2012 in order to
address four key questions: (1) what factors best explain support for employment dis-
crimination over time?, (2) who are the members of the political hard core that continue
to support the firing of teachers despite evolving societal attitudes toward members of
the LGBT community?, (3) has the pace of change on this issue been more rapid in
recent years similar to the sea change in public opinion toward same-sex marriage?, and
(4) have the factors that predict support for employment discrimination remained the
same over the course of the past 25 years or have these important antecedent variables
and their respective influences changed over time?

A Focus on Employment Discrimination

The Pew Research Center has been tracking political and social values over the course
of the past 25 years. One key component of these surveys has focused on assessing
attitudes towards LGBT concerns including employment discrimination and equal
rights. Specifically, Pew has been tracking public support for granting school
boards the authority to fire known homosexual teachers since 1987. Figure 1 displays
the percentage of respondents indicating their agreement with granting school boards
this authority between 1987 and 2012. As Figure 1 shows, a majority of Americans
(51.5%) indicated support for the practice when data was first collected in 1987.
Support for employment discrimination generally declined over the course of the
25-year period under study although slight upticks in support can be seen in 1994
and 2002. By 2012, the last wave of the Pew data collection, support had leveled off at
21.0% with 1 in 5 Americans still indicating that they agree school boards should have
the authority to fire known homosexual teachers.

Public Opinion toward LGBT Civil Rights Issues: Demographics,

Predispositions, and Cultural Values
Previous research has examined the significant influence of key demographic consid-
erations on support for a variety of LGBT civil rights issues. Specifically, research has
344 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH

Figure 1
Support for giving school boards the authority to fire known homosexual teachers
(1987–2012)
60.0%

50.0%
51.5%51.5%
49.2%
47.7%
40.0% 39.2%
% Agreement

39.6% 38.2%
35.7%
30.0% 34.1% 32.9%
32.5% 31.8%
28.3% 27.9%
20.0%
21.0%

Downloaded from http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/ at Carleton University on June 23, 2015

10.0%

0.0%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
1987
1988
1989
1990

1992
1991

1993

1994

1997

1999
2002

2003

2007

2009

2012
consistently shown that women and those with higher levels of education tend to be
more supportive of marriage equality and other related issues (Becker & Scheufele,
2009; Brewer, 2008). On the other hand, age has been shown to be inversely related to
support for LGBT civil rights and marriage equality in particular (Becker, 2012a;
Becker & Scheufele, 2011). As a second point of exploration, public opinion research
generally then considers the influence of religious and political value predispositions
on support for LGBT rights. Previous efforts have confirmed the significant positive
relationships between religiosity and conservative political outlooks and opposition
toward same-sex marriage and other civil rights issues (Becker & Scheufele, 2009;
Campbell & Monson, 2008; Ellison, Acevedo, & Ramos Wada, 2011; Olson, Cadge, &
Harrison, 2006; Sherkat, De Vries, & Creek, 2010; Sherkat, Powell-Williams,
Maddox, & de Vries, 2011) while others have shown that core cultural and political
values like political tolerance (Baunach, Burgess, & Muse, 2010; Becker & Scheufele,
2009; Sotelo, 2000) and increasing rates of social contact (Barth, Overby, & Huffmon,
2009; Becker, 2012a; Herek & Glunt, 1993; Lewis, 2011) are also important factors
shaping public opinion. Grounded in this extant research, the current investigation
first examines the influence of demographics, predispositions, and cultural values on
public acceptability of employment discrimination over time.

Defining the Political Hard Core

Despite a push toward greater tolerance for LGBT individuals, the fact remains that a
group of hard core individuals (21% in 2012) still agree that school boards should
have the authority to fire known homosexual teachers. Public opinion research has
consistently defined the hard core as ‘‘a group of individuals with minority viewpoints
who are immune to social pressure’’ (Ho et al., 2011, p. 349; Noelle-Neumann, 1993).
 RESEARCH NOTE 345
These hard core individuals are the heart of an issue public (Converse, 1964), or a
group of motivated citizens who not only hold strong opinions on particular contro-
versial issues but are also more inclined to engage in issue-specific political partici-
pation to express their point-of-view and policy preferences (Becker, Dalrymple,
Brossard, Scheufele, & Gunther, 2010; Kim, 2009; Krosnick, 1990; Price, David,
Goldthorpe, Roth, & Cappella, 2006). As a second point of inquiry, the present
study works to define this political hard core in an effort to enhance our understand-
ing of what variables best predict interest in maintaining minority viewpoints toward
employment discrimination in the face of majority opposition.

A Sea Change or Steady Shifts in Attitudes? Reviewing

Downloaded from http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/ at Carleton University on June 23, 2015

Twenty-Five Years of Survey Data
Recent deliberations before the U.S. Supreme Court over the legality of Proposition 8
and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) have led politicians, pollsters, and the
press to declare a ‘‘sea change’’ in public opinion toward gay marriage, with Chief
Justice Roberts suggesting that ‘‘political leaders are falling all over themselves’’ to
endorse same-sex marriage, (Harwood, 2013; Johnson, 2013). Survey data confirms a
rapid change in support for same-sex marriage. According to Pew, only 33% of
Americans favored legalizing same-sex marriage in 2003; 10 years later, almost a
majority support same sex-marriage (49%) with much of this recent and rapid
growth in support being driven by the views of Millennials (Pew, 2013). Pundits
and academic researchers have pointed toward a variety of factors that might be
influencing this sea change including increasing rates of social contact, generational
replacement of older voters with those new to the electorate, and increasing visibility
of gay and lesbian teenagers (Becker, 2012a; Lewis, 2011; Woodruff, 2013). Of par-
ticular interest is whether this rapid sea change in attitudes toward same-sex marriage
is mirrored across other LGBT civil rights concerns like employment non-discrim-
ination. Moreover, it is also worth examining whether the factors predicting opinions
and their relative influence have remained the same over time similar to the connec-
tions between value predispositions and same-sex marriage, or whether certain vari-
ables have become more or less important over time (e.g., age, social contact, and
gender in the case of marriage equality).

Methods
A series of analyses were conducted using data collected by the Pew Research Center
for the People & the Press between 1987 and 2012. Fifteen large national surveys
(N ¼ 35,578) were fielded during this twenty-five year span with data collection
occurring either via face-to-face interviews (1987–1990) or via the telephone (1991–
2012) using a random-digit-dial (RDD) technique. The dataset was first made avail-
able for public download in April 2012. Full information about each survey is
archived on the Pew Research Center web site (see: http://www.people-press.org/
2012/06/04/about-the-values-survey-data/). The key measures used in the analyses
are outlined below.
346 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH

Key Measures
Dependent Variable: Support for School Board Authority to Fire
Known Homosexual Teachers
Respondent support for employment discrimination was based on agreement with the
statement ‘‘school boards ought to have the right to fire teachers who are known
homosexuals.’’ Responses were coded on a four-point scale (1 ¼ ‘‘completely dis-
agree,’’ 2 ¼ ‘‘mostly disagree,’’ 3 ¼ ‘‘mostly agree,’’ and 4 ¼ ‘‘completely agree’’).
Independent variables: demographics. Controls for gender (female ¼ 1),
age (in years), and education (1 ¼ ‘‘none or grade 1-8’’ to 6 ¼ ‘‘college degree or
higher’’) were included in all models.

Downloaded from http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/ at Carleton University on June 23, 2015

Independent variables: predispositions. Five measures tapping political
and religious value predispositions were included in the analyses. Two political meas-
ures were included: (1) party-ID Republican (1 ¼ Republican, 0 ¼ all else) and (2)
political ideology [for 1987 & 1993, (1 ¼ ‘‘liberal,’’ 2 ¼ ‘‘moderate,’’ 3 ¼ ‘‘conserva-
tive’’); for 2002–2012 (1 ¼ ‘‘very liberal’’ to 5 ¼ ‘‘very conservative’’). The three
items measuring religious value predispositions included: (1) church attendance or be-
havior [for 1987, 1998, 1994, (1 ¼ ‘‘a few times a year’’ to 4 ¼ ‘‘every week’’); for
1997–2012, (1 ¼ ‘‘seldom’’ to 5 ¼ ‘‘more than once a week’’), (2) identifying as an
evangelical (1 ¼ yes) or belonging (3) and religiosity or belief which was measured
by agreement (1 ¼ ‘‘completely disagree’’ to 4 ¼ ‘‘completely agree’’) with three state-
ments: (a) ‘‘Prayer is an important part of my daily life,’’ (b) ‘‘We will all be called
before God at the Judgment Day to answer for our sins,’’ and (c) ‘‘I never doubt the
existence of God.’’ Only item b was asked in 1992 and 1993; otherwise all three
measures were combined to form an index for use in the analyses. The three-item
religiosity index was highly reliable across the full data set (Cronbach’s alpha ¼ 0.85)
and when looking at the measures within individual survey years (e.g., 1987
alpha ¼ 0.80; 2002 alpha ¼ 0.80; 2012 alpha ¼ 0.85).
Independent variables: cultural values. Two measures tapping cultural
values were included in the analyses: (1) a belief that we have pushed equality too far,
or agreement (1 ¼ ‘‘completely disagree’’ to 4 ¼ ‘‘completely agree’’) with the state-
ment, ‘‘We have gone too far in pushing equal rights in this country,’’ and (2) an old-
fashioned orientation, or agreement with the statement, ‘‘I have old-fashioned values
about family and marriage.’’

Results
Table 1 displays a series of 14 regression models predicting support for giving school
boards the authority to fire known homosexual teachers over a 25-year time span. For
each year, demographic variables were entered in block 1, followed by political and
religious value predispositions in block 2, and cultural values in block 3. In general,
demographics explained between 3.1 and 7.9% of the variance in support for em-
ployment discrimination over the 14 survey years featured in Table 1 and consistently
suggested that more educated individuals and women were significantly less likely to
agree that school boards should have the authority to fire known homosexual teachers.
Table 1
Hierarchical OLS Regression Predicting Support for School Board Authority to Fire Known Homosexual Teachers (1987–2012)
1987 1988 1989 1990 1992 1993 1994 1997 1999 2002 2003 2007 2009 2012

% Agreement can fire 51.5% 51.5% 47.7% 49.2% 39.6% 34.1% 38.2% 32.5% 31.8% 35.7% 32.9% 28.3% 27.9% 21.0%
homosexual teachers

Block 1: Demographics
Female –.11*** –.14*** –.12*** –.13*** –.12*** –.17*** –.12*** –.15*** –.12*** –.13*** –.13*** –.10*** –.09*** –.06***
Age .00 .04* .04* .01 .06*** .04 .07* .04 .06* .08*** .04* .07*** .04* .05**
Education –.12*** –.16*** –.12*** –.16*** –.15*** –.09*** –.12*** –.15*** –.12** –.16*** –.11*** –.12*** –.12*** –.13***
Incremental R2 4.3% 7.9% 5.2% 6.9% 5.5% 4.6% 6.5% 6.1% 3.1% 7.1% 3.8% 3.8% 4.3% 4.4%

Block 2: Political and Religious Value Predispositions

Republican .05*** .08*** .12*** .05** .07*** .09*** .07* .09** .06* .04* .03 .04 .01 –.01
Ideology (conservative) .06*** N/A N/A N/A N/A .08** N/A N/A N/A .08*** .02 .02 .05** .07***
Religious attendance –.02 –.03 N/A N/A N/A N/A –.02 .11*** .09* .03 .02 .02 –.03 .01
Evangelical .10*** .10*** .14*** .11*** .16*** .12*** .11*** .11*** .16*** .11*** .11*** .06** .05** .06**
RESEARCH NOTE

Religiosity .18*** .23*** .11*** .13*** .11***^ .12*** .17*** .05 .08* .13*** .14*** .11*** .22*** .11***
Incremental R2 9.9% 10.4% 8.9% 8.5% 6.5% 7.9% 8.3% 8.1% 9.6% 9.0% 7.1% 4.6% 9.9% 5.7%

Block 3: Cultural Values

Push equality too far .16*** .15*** .17*** .18*** .15*** .18*** .19*** .09*** .14*** .14*** –.03 –.03 –.03 –.03
Old fashioned .11*** .08*** .12*** .15*** N/A N/A .08** .13*** .11*** .03 .14*** .15** .14*** .19***
Incremental R2 3.7% 2.9% 4.3% 5.1% 2.1% 2.9% 4.3% 2.5% 3.3% 1.9% 1.8% 1.9% 1.8% 2.7%
Final R2 17.9% 21.2% 18.4% 20.5% 14.1% 15.4% 19.1% 16.7% 16.0% 18.0% 12.7% 10.3% 15.0% 12.5%
N 4,244 3,021 2,048 3,004 3,517 1,507 1,009 1,165 985 2,502 2,528 2,007 3,013 3,008

Note: *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001. Cell entries for all models are final standardized regression coefficients. ^ only 1 of 3 items from religiosity scale asked in 1992 and
1993. Data from 1991 had more than 3 key variables missing, and is therefore not included in longitudinal analysis.
347

Downloaded from http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/ at Carleton University on June 23, 2015

348 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH

As the data in Table 1 shows, the size of the relationship between gender and support
for employment discrimination seems to be decreasing in later survey years. While age
was positively related to support for giving school boards the authority to fire known
homosexual teachers and suggested that older individuals were more accepting of
employment discrimination, this relationship was smaller in size than education and
gender and only significant in nine of fourteen models.
Political and religious value predispositions, entered as block 2 of the models,
explained the largest amount of the variance in the dependent variable, support for
giving school boards the authority to fire known homosexual teachers. While
Republicans were initially significantly more likely to support employment discrim-
ination in the earlier survey years up through 2002, party identification failed to
remain as a significant predictor between 2002 and 2012. While conservative political

Downloaded from http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/ at Carleton University on June 23, 2015

orientation was generally a positive predictor of support for employment discrimin-
ation, the size of this effect was relatively small. With respect to religious value
predispositions, identifying as evangelical and religiosity were positively related to
support for employment discrimination, though the size of these variables fluctuated
some over time. In particular, the size of the relationship between identifying as
evangelical and support for employment discrimination has appeared to wane in
recent years. While religious attendance was a significant predictor of support for
employment discrimination in the late 1990s (1997 and 1999), this variable did not
emerge as a consistent factor shaping attitudes toward the permissibility of employ-
ment discrimination. Overall political and religious value predispositions explained
between 4.6 and 10.4% of the variance in the dependent variable and accounted
for the largest incremental increase in R2 across all model years.
Cultural values were included in the final block of the models and explained a small
amount of incremental variance in the dependent variable, ranging from a low of 1.8%
in 2003 and 2009 to a high of 4.3% in 1989 and 1994. Despite this low incremental
increase in R2, these variables were still important factors in the models after con-
trolling for demographics and predispositions. The models suggest that the belief that
the push for equal rights has gone too far was a significant positive predictor of
support for employment discrimination until 2002. After this point in time, this
cultural value was no longer a significant predictor in the models; moreover, the
relationship changed from a positive to a negative orientation. Possessing old-
fashioned values about marriage and family was also a significant positive predictor
of support for giving school boards the authority to fire known homosexual teachers
(with the exception of 2002, and in 1992–1993 when the item was not asked as part of
the survey questionnaire). Over time, the size of the coefficient for this relationship
generally increased reaching a high of  ¼ .19 in 2012. Overall, the full models
explained a significant amount of variation in support for employment discrimination
over time, ranging from a low final R2 of 10.3% in 2007 to a high of 21.2% in 1988.
Across most years, the final R2 fluctuated between 15 and 20% of explained variance.
Taken together, the hierarchical OLS regression models displayed in Table 1 suggest
that over time, gender, education, religious belonging (evangelical) and belief (religi-
osity), and old-fashioned values have been important factors explaining variation in
public support for employment discrimination. Looking at the 2012 data in particular,
the political hard core, or the 21% who remain supportive of employment
 RESEARCH NOTE 349
discrimination tend to be older individuals with lower levels of education (men in
particular), more conservative in both their political ideology and religious beliefs and
sense of belonging, and more likely to exhibit old-fashioned cultural values, at least
with respect to marriage and family.
The second part of the analyses focused on considering whether attitudes toward
employment discrimination have changed more rapidly in recent years similar to the
sea change in public opinion toward marriage equality. In addition, the research also
considers whether key factors explaining variation in support for employment dis-
crimination have remained consistent over the past 25 years or if the importance and
influence of these factors has changed over time. Table 2 displays a second set of
regression models designed to explore these research questions, pooling data from
1987 and 2002 and 2002 and 2012. These three survey years were chosen given an

Downloaded from http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/ at Carleton University on June 23, 2015

approximate 15% drop in support for employment discrimination (from a high of
51.5% in 1987 to 35.7% in 2002 and then a low of 21.0% in 2012; a drop of 15.8%
and then 14.7%, respectively) and because these data collection years include the only
three periods that featured a full set of the key independent variables discussed above.
Table 2 displays the incremental R2 for the independent variables featured in the first
analysis for each set of pooled data (1987–2002 vs. 2002–2012; labeled as block 1) as
well as the before-entry betas for a series of interaction terms that combined survey
year (earlier year coded as 0; later year coded as 1) and the key independent variables
of interest. These interaction terms were created by multiplying the standardized
values of key component elements (e.g., year and age) to avoid possible problems
of multicollinearity (Cohen, Cohen, West, & Aiken, 2003).
As the data in Table 2 show, age, education, religiosity, having old-fashioned
values, and a belief that the push for equality has gone too far were more important
predictors of support for employment discrimination in 2002 versus in 1987.
Specifically, while age was positively related to support for employment discrimin-
ation later on, more educated, religious, old-fashioned, and anti-equality individuals
were more likely to support allowing school boards to fire known homosexual teachers
when Pew first started collecting data in 1987. When looking at the 2002–2012 data,
the results suggest that religious and political value predispositions were more im-
portant predictors of support for employment discrimination in 2012 than in 2002 as
was a belief that there had been too great a push for equality in the United States.
Women and more educated individuals were significantly less likely to express support
for employment discrimination, more so in 2012 than in 2002. Overall, the set of
interactions only explained an incremental increase in R2 of 0.6% when pooling the
1987–2002 data, yet a 2.1% increase when pooling the 2002–2012 data suggesting that
the time factor may have been more important during the last decade of data collec-
tion than during the first 15 years and that similar to the case of marriage equality,
opinions may have changed more rapidly, or at a more frequent pace, in recent years.
Moreover, the varying pattern of significant before-entry betas for the regression
interactions suggest that certain factors were more important in explaining variation
in attitudes between 2002 and 2012 (e.g., religious and political value predispositions
and gender) than between 1987 and 2002 and that the direction of the relationship
between key demographic considerations (e.g., age, education) and support for em-
ployment discrimination actually reversed over time. Taken together, the results
350 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH

Table 2
Hierarchical OLS Regression Predicting Support for School Board Authority to Fire
Known Homosexual Teachers with Interaction Effects (1987 vs. 2002; 2002 vs. 2012)
1987–2002 2002–2012
2
Block 1: Incremental R 16.9% 14.8%

Block 2: Year and Independent Variable Interaction Terms

Year  Female –.01 .05***
Year  Age .03** –.04**
Year  Education –.03** .06***
Year  Republican –.02 –.05***
Year  Ideology –.01 –.05***

Downloaded from http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/ at Carleton University on June 23, 2015

Year  Evangelical –.01 –.07***
Year  Religiosity –.04** –.04**
Year  Old-fashioned –.04*** .02
Year  Equality –.02 10***
Incremental R2 0.6% 2.1%
Final R2 17.5% 16.9%
Note: *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001. Block 1 variables include all direct effects entered as Blocks 1–3 in
Table 1 (e.g., Demographics, Political and Religious Value Predispositions, Cultural Values). Cell entries in
Block 2 are before-entry standardized regression coefficients. For interaction purposes, the earlier year (e.g.,
1987, 2002 was coded as 0). The scaling of the ideology variable was a 3-point scale in 1987 and switched to
a 5-point scale in 2002 and 2012.

suggest that predispositions may be slightly less central to the employment discrim-
ination debate at present than they once were. Moreover, similar to the case of public
opinion toward same-sex marriage, attitudes regarding the permissibility of employ-
ment discrimination have seen more rapid change, or a more pronounced shift toward
a more tolerant outlook, in the last 10 years than in the first 15.

Discussion
The current study set out to explore public opinion toward employment discrimin-
ation over a 25-year period (1987–2012) by considering what factors best predict
support for giving school boards the authority to fire known homosexual teachers,
what defines the political hard core who remain steadfast in their support for the
practice, whether the pace or rate of change in opinions on this issue has been con-
sistent or more rapid in recent years similar to the case of marriage equality, and
finally whether the factors that predict support for employment discrimination have
remained relatively stable in their influence over time. Overall, the results suggest that
similar to marriage equality, religious and political value predispositions explain the
most variation in support for employment discrimination though demographic con-
siderations and cultural values are still important concerns. The political hard core
who continue to agree that school boards should have the authority to fire known
homosexual teachers are more likely to be less educated men who are both more re-
ligious and more conservative with old-fashioned values toward marriage and family.
 RESEARCH NOTE 351
The second analysis confirmed that opinions changed more rapidly between 2002 and
2012 than between 1987 and 2002, with survey year playing a more important factor
in the later 10-year period. Finally, while demographics and cultural values were more
important predictors of opinion early on, the influence of religious and political value
predispositions, while still important, has diminished in recent years.
While there were of course some limitations given the secondary nature of the Pew
dataset and it is unfortunate that some key independent variables were missing
from certain survey years, that scaling varied for key independent variables over
time (e.g., ideology), or that other key concepts like social contact were not included
in the data collection efforts, the study as a whole presents a comprehensive look at
employment non-discrimination and changing levels of support for giving school
boards the authority to fire known homosexual teachers. The results suggest that

Downloaded from http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/ at Carleton University on June 23, 2015

while scholars were focused on the case of marriage equality, considerable shifts in
opinion were taking place with respect to other LGBT civil rights concerns like
employment discrimination. While this shift has been more pronounced in recent
years, a hard core group of individuals still find employment discrimination to be
permissible. Combined with the political reality that a majority of U.S. states and the
federal government still fail to offer protections based on sexual orientation, there may
be good cause for future research to revisit opinions toward other LGBT civil rights
issues in addition to marriage equality and for advocacy organizations to return to the
cause of employment non-discrimination.

References
Barth, J., Overby, L. M., & Huffmon, S. H. (2009). Community context, personal
contact, and support for an anti-gay rights referendum. Political Research Quarterly,
62, 355–365. doi:10.1177/1065912908317033.
Baunach, D. M. (2011). Decomposing trends in attitudes toward gay marriage,
1988–2006. Social Science Quarterly, 92(2), 346–363. doi:10.1111/j.1540-
6237.2011.00772.x.
Baunach, D. M. (2012). Changing same-sex marriage attitudes in America from 1988
through 2010. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(2), 364–378. doi:10.1093/poq/nfs022.
Baunach, D. M., Burgess, E. O., & Muse, C. S. (2010). Southern (dis)comfort: Sexual
prejudice and contact with gay men and lesbians in the South. Sociological
Spectrum, 30(1), 30–64. doi:10.1080/02732170903340893.
Becker, A. B. (2012a). Determinants of public support for same-sex marriage:
Generational cohorts, social contact, and shifting attitudes. International Journal
of Public Opinion Research, 24(4), 524–533. doi:10.1093/ijpor/eds002.
Becker, A. B. (2012b). What’s marriage (and family) got to do with it? Support for
same-sex marriage, legal unions, and gay and lesbian couples raising children. Social
Science Quarterly. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2012.00844.x.
Becker, A. B., Dalrymple, K. E., Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A., & Gunther, A. C.
(2010). Getting citizens involved: How controversial policy debates stimulate issue
participation during a political campaign. International Journal of Public Opinion
Research, 22(2), 181–203. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edp047.
352 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH

Becker, A. B., & Scheufele, D. A. (2009). Moral politicking: Public attitudes toward
gay marriage in an election context. International Journal of Press/Politics, 14(2),
186–211. doi:10.1177/1940161208330905.
Becker, A. B., & Scheufele, D. A. (2011). New voters, new outlook? Predispositions,
social networks, and the changing politics of gay civil rights. Social Science
Quarterly, 92(2), 324–345. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00771.x.
Becker, A. B., & Todd, M. E. (2013). A new American family? Public opinion
toward family status and perceptions of the challenges faced by children of
same-sex parents. Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 9(5), 425–448. doi:10.1080/
1550428X.2013.822841.
Brewer, P. R. (2008). Value war: Public opinion and the politics of gay rights. Lanham,
MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Downloaded from http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/ at Carleton University on June 23, 2015

Brewer, P. R., & Wilcox, C. (2005). Same-sex marriage and civil unions. Public
Opinion Quarterly, 69(4), 599–616. doi:10.1093/poq/nfi052.
Campbell, D. E., & Monson, J. Q. (2008). The religion card: Gay marriage and the
2004 presidential election. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(3), 399–419. doi:10.1093/
poq/nfn032.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/
correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. E. Apter
(Ed.), Ideology and Discontent (pp. 206–261). New York: Free Press.
Dowd, M. (2013, March 30). Will Gays be punished for success? The New
York Times, Retrieved March 31, 2013, from http://www.nytimes.
com/2013/03/31/opinion/sunday/dowd-will-gays-be-punished-for-success.html?
ref¼opinion&_r¼0.
Ellison, C. G., Acevedo, G. A., & Ramos Wada, A. I. (2011). Religion and attitudes
toward same sex marriage among US Latinos. Social Science Quarterly, 92(1),
35–56. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00756.x.
Harwood, J. (2013, March 25). A sea change in less than 50 years as gay rights gained
momentum. The New York Times, Retrieved March 29, 2013, from http://www.
nytimes.com/2013/03/26/us/in-less-than-50-years-a-sea-change-on-gay-rights.
html.
Herek, G. M. (2009). Hate crimes and stigma-related experiences among sexual
minority adults in the United States: Prevalence estimates from a national prob-
ability sample. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24(1), 54–74. doi:10.1177/
0886260508316477.
Herek, G. M., & Glunt, E. K. (1993). Interpersonal contact and heterosexuals’ atti-
tudes toward gay men: Results from a national survey. The Journal of Sex Research,
30(3), 239–244. doi:10.1080/00224499309551707.
Ho, S. S., Binder, A. R., Becker, A. B., Moy, P., Scheufele, D. A., Brossard, D., &
Gunther, A. C. (2011). The role of perceptions of media bias in general and issue-
specific political participation. Mass Communication and Society, 14(3), 343–374.
doi:10.1080/15205436.2010.491933.
Johnson, A. (2013, March 27). Roberts: ‘Political figures are falling all over themselves
to endorse your side of the case’. National Review Online, Retrieved March 29,
 RESEARCH NOTE 353
2013, from http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/344100/roberts-political-fig
ures-are-falling-all-over-themselves-endorse-your-side-case-andre.
Johnson, K. (2013, February 6). After floating idea of lifting ban on gays, scouts delay
decision. The New York Times, Retrieved March 31, 2013, from http://www.
nytimes.com/2013/02/07/us/boy-scouts-postpone-decision-on-gays.html.
Kim, Y. M. (2009). Issue publics in the new information environment: Selectivity,
domain specificity, and extremity. Communication Research, 36(2), 254–284.
doi:10.1177/0093650208330253.
Krosnick, J. A. (1990). Government policy and citizen passion: A study of issue
publics in contemporary America. Political Behavior, 12(1), 59–92. doi:10.1007/
BF00992332.
Lewis, G. B. (2005). Same-Sex marriage and the 2004 Presidential Election. PS:

Downloaded from http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/ at Carleton University on June 23, 2015

Political Science and Politics, 38(02), 195–199. doi:10.1017/S1049096505056295.
Lewis, G. B. (2011). The friends and family plan: Contact with gays and support
for gay rights. Policy Studies Journal, 39(2), 217–238. doi:10.1111/j.1541-
0072.2011.00405.x.
Lewis, G. B., & Gossett, C. W. (2008). Changing public opinion on same sex mar-
riage: The case of California. Politics & Policy, 36(1), 4–30. doi:10.1111/j.1747-
1346.2007.00092.x.
Lewis, G. B., & Oh, S. S. (2008). Public opinion and state action on same-sex
marriage. State & Local Government Review, 40(1), 42–53. doi:10.1177/
0160323X0804000104.
Noelle-Neumann, E. (1993). The spiral of silence: Public opinion, our social skin (2nd
ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Olson, L. R., Cadge, W., & Harrison, J. T. (2006). Religion and public opinion about
same-sex marriage. Social Science Quarterly, 87(2), 340–360. doi:10.1111/j.1540-
6237.2006.00384.x.
Peters, J. W. (2013, November 7). Senate approves ban on antigay bias in workplace.
The New York Times, Retrieved November 21, 2013, from http://www.nytimes.
com/2013/11/08/us/politics/senate-moves-to-final-vote-on-workplace-gay-bias-
ban.html.
Pew. (2013, March 20). Growing support for gay marrage: Changed minds
and changing demographics. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press
Retrieved August 15, 2013, from http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-
pdf/3-20-13GayMarriageRelease.pdf.
Price, V., David, C., Goldthorpe, B., Roth, M. M., & Cappella, J. N. (2006). Locating
the issue public: The multi-dimensional nature of engagement with health care
reform. Political Behavior, 28(1), 33–63. doi:10.1007/s11109-005-9001-2.
Sherkat, D. E., De Vries, K. M., & Creek, S. (2010). Race, religion, and opposition to
same-sex marriage. Social Science Quarterly, 91(1), 80–98. doi:10.1111/j.1540-
6237.2010.00682.x.
Sherkat, D. E., Powell-Williams, M., Maddox, G., & de Vries, K. M. (2011).
Religion, politics, and support for same-sex marriage in the United States, 1988-
2008. Social Science Research, 40, 167–180. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.08.009.
Sotelo, M. J. (2000). Political tolerance among adolescents towards homosexuals in
Spain. Journal of Homosexuality, 39(1), 95–105. doi:10.1300/J082v39n01_06.
354 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH

Woodruff, J. (2013, March 28). Will ‘sea change’ in public opinion matter in same-sex
marriage ruling. PBS News Hour, Retrieved August 15, 2013, from http://www.
pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2013/03/judys-notebook-will-sea-change-in-public-
opinion-matter-in-same-sex-marriage-ruling.html.

Biographical Note
Amy B. Becker (Ph.D., University of Wisconsin-Madison, abbecker@loyola.edu) is an
Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication at Loyola University
Maryland in Baltimore, MD. Her current research examines public opinion on con-
troversial issues and the effects of exposure and attention to political entertainment

Downloaded from http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/ at Carleton University on June 23, 2015

including late night comedy.