(Page 3 of 39) - Quick, Bar the Gates!: Ohio's Issue 1 (Same-Sex Marriage Ban) and Religious Communities authored by Djupe, Paul., Neiheisel, Jake., Sokhey, Anand. and Niles, Franklyn.

Info/Citation	FAQ Research All Academic Inc.
Document

Quick, Bar the Gates!: Ohio's Issue 1 (Same-Sex Marriage Ban) and Religious Communities

Unformatted Document Text: 2 Church in Columbus; he and other ministers traveled the state stumping for the amendment’s passage on a “Silent No More” tour (Johnson and Mahoney, 2004: 01C; Shapiro, 2004: 6A). Curiously absent from the media coverage of clergy involvement with Issue 1, however, were reports concerning ministerial organizations—formal or informal gatherings of clergy that are often ecumenical or even interfaith in character (Djupe and Niles, 2005). Previous studies of MOs in the media suggest that these organizations stand out as sources for journalists to turn to for commentary on salient issues and events (Djupe and Niles, 2005). Thus, the lack of media coverage concerning ministerial organizations (MOs) and Ohio’s same-sex marriage ban is particularly puzzling, especially given the prevalence of media coverage surrounding the amendment (and more specifically, its proponents). Despite the historic role that MOs have had in lending a spiritual voice to pressing social or political issues, such parachurch organizations rarely made the news as speaking out on Issue 1 (though see Horn’s (2004) report from the infamous Talon News). In this paper, we wish to detail the involvement of MOs in the debate over Ohio Issue 1—a debate which, by most media accounts, elicited some kind of response from many groups within the state, religious and secular alike. MOs are a basic part of the professional life of clergy (Djupe and Gilbert 2003), but appeared to be strangely silent throughout a campaign that reached a fever pitch in other arenas. Were MOs involved in the Ohio Issue 1 campaign, and if so, how? What barriers existed to MO participation in the Issue 1 campaign? And finally, how do the answers to such questions add to our overall understanding of MOs, religion’s role in U.S. politics, and to the study of group politics in general? D ATA A ND R ESEARCH D ESIGN To answer these questions, and to reconcile the minimal Ohio Issue 1 campaign coverage of MOs with previous scholarly accounts of MO participation in public affairs, we asked Columbus-

Authors: Djupe, Paul., Neiheisel, Jake., Sokhey, Anand. and Niles, Franklyn.

first

previous

Page 3 of 39

next

last

background image

2

Church in Columbus; he and other ministers traveled the state stumping for the amendment’s

passage on a “Silent No More” tour (Johnson and Mahoney, 2004: 01C; Shapiro, 2004: 6A).

Curiously absent from the media coverage of clergy involvement with Issue 1, however,

were reports concerning ministerial organizations—formal or informal gatherings of clergy that are

often ecumenical or even interfaith in character (Djupe and Niles, 2005). Previous studies of MOs in

the media suggest that these organizations stand out as sources for journalists to turn to for

commentary on salient issues and events (Djupe and Niles, 2005). Thus, the lack of media coverage

concerning ministerial organizations (MOs) and Ohio’s same-sex marriage ban is particularly

puzzling, especially given the prevalence of media coverage surrounding the amendment (and more

specifically, its proponents). Despite the historic role that MOs have had in lending a spiritual voice

to pressing social or political issues, such parachurch organizations rarely made the news as speaking

out on Issue 1 (though see Horn’s (2004) report from the infamous Talon News).

In this paper, we wish to detail the involvement of MOs in the debate over Ohio Issue 1—a

debate which, by most media accounts, elicited some kind of response from many groups within the

state, religious and secular alike. MOs are a basic part of the professional life of clergy (Djupe and

Gilbert 2003), but appeared to be strangely silent throughout a campaign that reached a fever pitch

in other arenas. Were MOs involved in the Ohio Issue 1 campaign, and if so, how? What barriers

existed to MO participation in the Issue 1 campaign? And finally, how do the answers to such

questions add to our overall understanding of MOs, religion’s role in U.S. politics, and to the study

of group politics in general?

D

ATA A ND

R

ESEARCH

D

ESIGN

To answer these questions, and to reconcile the minimal Ohio Issue 1 campaign coverage of

MOs with previous scholarly accounts of MO participation in public affairs, we asked Columbus-

Convention

All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention.

Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.

Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!

Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!

Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.

Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!

Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!

Click here for more information.

first

previous

Page 3 of 39

next

last

©2008 All Academic, Inc.