Do State Laws Concerning Homosexuals Reflect the Preeminence of Conservative-Liberal Individual Differences?

• Published in: The Journal of social psychology Vol. 151; no. 3; pp. 227 - 239
• Main Author: McCann, Stewart J. H.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Philadelphia, PA Taylor & Francis Group 01.05.2011; Taylor & Francis; Taylor & Francis Inc
• Subjects: Behavior. Attitude; Biological and medical sciences; conservatism; Correlation analysis; Criteria; Data Collection; Educational Status; Female; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Gays & lesbians; homophobia; Homosexuality, Female - psychology; Homosexuality, Male - psychology; Humans; Individuality; law; Liberalism; Male; Marriage - legislation & jurisprudence; Marriage - psychology; Political science; Politics; Prejudice; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychology. Psychophysiology; Religion and Psychology; same-sex marriage; sexual prejudice; Social Environment; Social Justice - legislation & jurisprudence; Social psychology; Social Values; Socioeconomic Factors; State laws; Studies; United States; Urbanization; United States; North America; America; Social environment; Human; Conservatism; Homosexuality; law; same-sex marriage; Legislation; Préjudice; Political attitude; Cultural environment; Homophobia; sexual prejudice; Marriage; Liberalism
• ISSN: 0022-4545; 1940-1183
• DOI: 10.1080/00224540903366792

The present study was conducted to determine whether individual-level correlates of sexual prejudice (i.e., conservatism-liberalism, religious fundamentalism, educational levels, urbanism, income, and living in the South) are predictive at the state level of laws restricting homosexual behaviors and desires. Criterion 1 was a multifaceted index of state laws concerning gay men and lesbians; Criterion 2 was an index of state laws regarding same-sex partnerships. Multiple regression strategies showed that state conservatism-liberalism, as determined from the responses of 141,798 individuals aggregated at the state level ( Erikson, Wright, & McIver, 1993 ), was the prime state-level predictor of both criteria. For Criterion 1, only Southern state status accounted for additional variance (4.2%) above the 54.8% already accounted for by conservatism-liberalism. For Criterion 2, no other variables accounted for variance beyond the 44.6% accounted for by state conservatism-liberalism.