Discourse analysis on same-sex relationship through the lens of religious and social belief systems

Abstract

Religious beliefs and systems have a profound impact on shaping individuals' attitudes towards same-sex relationships. There is a diverse range of perspectives within religious communities, with some individuals adhering to traditional teachings that condemn homosexuality, while others engage in a process of reinterpretation to support and accept same-sex relationships. This qualitative study aims to analyze the different perspectives about same-sex relationship from the lenses of religious and social belief systems. Purposive sampling was used to select the participants (n=16) who identify themselves as a member of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer (LGBTQ) community (n=5) and religious people (n=11). Findings indicated the complexity of religious influence on social issues and emphasizes the role of individual engagement with faith in either hindering or facilitating acceptance to same-sex relationship. People who are inclined to their religious faith tend to condemn same-sex relationship. Notably, this study observed different interpretations of people about their religion and faith. While others believed it is against God’s will to engage in same-sex relationship, others interpret their belief in more holistic and inclusive way. Nevertheless, this study underscored the importance of understanding the evolving societal attitudes and the role of religion in fostering social discussion, tolerance, and inclusivity within diverse religious communities and society at large.

Full text

Environment and Social Psychology (2024) Volume 9 Issue 1
doi: 10.54517/esp.v9i1.1912
1
Research Article
Discourse analysis on same-sex relationship through the lens of
religious and social belief systems
Jason V. Chavez1,*, Collin C. Ceneciro2
1 Research Department, Zamboanga Peninsula Polytechnic State University, Zamboanga City 7000, Philippines
2 College of Teacher Education, Zamboanga Peninsula Polytechnic State University, Zamboanga City 7000, Philippines
* Corresponding author: Jason V. Chavez, jasonchavez615@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Religious beliefs and systems have a profound impact on shaping individuals' attitudes towards same-sex
relationships. There is a diverse range of perspectives within religious communities, with some individuals adhering to
traditional teachings that condemn homosexuality, while others engage in a process of reinterpretation to support and
accept same-sex relationships. This qualitative study aims to analyze the different perspectives about same-sex
relationship from the lenses of religious and social belief systems. Purposive sampling was used to select the participants
(n=16) who identify themselves as a member of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer (LGBTQ) community (n=5)
and religious people (n=11). Findings indicated the complexity of religious influence on social issues and emphasizes the
role of individual engagement with faith in either hindering or facilitating acceptance to same-sex relationship. People
who are inclined to their religious faith tend to condemn same-sex relationship. Notably, this study observed different
interpretations of people about their religion and faith. While others believed it is against God’s will to engage in same-
sex relationship, others interpret their belief in more holistic and inclusive way. Nevertheless, this study underscored the
importance of understanding the evolving societal attitudes and the role of religion in fostering social discussion, tolerance,
and inclusivity within diverse religious communities and society at large.
Keywords: LGBTQ, religious belief; religious people, same-sex relationship; social belief
1. Introduction
Religious factors have been identified as strong factors when it comes to assessing public opinion
regarding same-sex romantic relationships. Studies among evangelical Protestants indicated that those who are
theologically conservative mostly oppose any sort of homosexual practice[1–4]. Some studies[5–7] also revealed
that evangelical Protestants with close ties to their fundamental beliefs oppose same-sex marriage and civil
unions. Theoretically, diverse religious traditions exhibit varying effects on support for same-sex practices,
which can be attributed to differing beliefs regarding the interpretation of the Bible[8].
The goal of this study was to explore the perceptions of religious people in Abrahamic system, e.g.,
Catholic and Muslims in the context of same-sex relationship. This study delved into different perspectives of
religious people about same-sex relationship and comparing their personal belief systems. This approach shed
light on the differences on religious and social contexts of same-sex relationship. This study also observed
ARTICLE INFO
Received: 12 July 2023 | Accepted: 11 September 2023 | Available online: 28 November 2023
CITATION
Chavez JV, Ceneciro CC. Discourse analysis on same-sex relationship through the lens of religious and social belief systems. Environment and
Social Psychology 2024; 9(1): 1912. doi: 10.54517/esp.v9i1.1912
COPYRIGHT
Copyright © 2023 by author(s). Environment and Social Psychology is published by Asia Pacific Academy of Science Pte. Ltd. This is an Open
Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/),
permitting distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is cited.

Environment and Social Psychology | doi: 10.54517/esp.v9i1.1912
2
different interpretations of religious belief systems among religious people.
Numerous studies have consistently observed a correlation between negative attitudes towards same-sex
relationships and certain demographic characteristics such as older, male, politically conservative, African
American, residing in more rural areas, possessing lower levels of education, having limited exposure to
diversity, adhering to the belief that homosexuality is a choice rather than an innate characteristic, endorsing
traditional gender roles, and, most notably, displaying higher levels of religious devotion and/or conservatism
as measured by various indicators[1,5,6,9–14].
Different dimensions of religion influence opinions on same-sex relationship[15–17]. Religious tradition
fortifies one’s personal identities, thereby shaping their perspectives on what is considered as morally
permissible or impermissible conduct. Van Geest[18] revealed that conservative evangelical Protestants exhibit
a greater likelihood to perceive same-sex marriage as a moral concern that contradicts their belief systems.
This study captured the perceptions of Filipino religious people, specifically the followers of Christianity
and Islam, in the context of same-sex relationship. This study delved into different insights based on two major
thematical directions—the social and religious belief systems. This is essential approach because some
studies[19–21] explained the potential attribution of religion to belief, and ultimately the overall reaction of a
person towards same-sex relationship. Even with small number of Muslim populations, African countries were
generally against homosexuality in terms of public opinion. It emerged that majority of Zimbabweans (96
percent), and Ugandans (90 percent), expressed the belief that homosexuality is never justifiable[19].
This study expected to collect context-valuable findings which can be used in comparing the perspectives
of religious people to same-sex relationship. In this study, same-sex relationship can be in union or marriage,
although neither was institutionalized currently in the Philippines. This study explored the complex belief
systems and their intricate comparisons based on personal interpretation of their religious beliefs and social
norms.
2. Literature review
Many studies were conducted on the perceptions of people about same-sex relationship. Studies noticed
certain factors that have traditionally been considered influential to negative attitudes for same-sex intimacy,
such as being of African American descent, believing that homosexuality is a matter of choice, and identifying
with political conservatism, are significantly influenced by religious factors[5,17,22]. In Philippine setting, the
study of Astillero et al.[23], indicated that majority of Filipinos (87 percent) believed it is one’s right to choose
whom he/she will love, and it does not hamper other’s morality (56 percent). Even with huge support from
majority, Philippines still experiences debates on same-sex relationship because the country is widely
influenced by Catholicism[24]. In this study, the narratives from religious people could provide in-depth analysis
on how religion could influence the belief and support to same-sex relationship.
Virtue theory places its foundation and emphasis on the ethical dimension of character, rather than
focusing on moral obligations. This aligns itself with the biblical emphasis on the emulation of Christ’s
character[25]. Utilitarianism, as a moral framework, assesses the ethical nature of an action by evaluating its
ability to maximize overall welfare for the largest number of individuals[25]. However, it has been argued that
this approach is problematic due to its potential to rationalize instances of injustice in the pursuit of the
collective benefit, without adequately considering or safeguarding the interests of marginalized or minority
groups[26]. In the context of same-sex relationship, controversies arise due to the differing perspectives
surrounding the non-affirming state on the concordance of homosexual individuals with God’s will[27–29].

Environment and Social Psychology | doi: 10.54517/esp.v9i1.1912
3
A noteworthy correlation has been observed between the subjective aspects of religiosity and individuals’
attitudes towards same-sex relationships[16,30,31]. The act of attending religious services fosters the development
of a cohesive social network comprising individuals who possess shared perspectives[32]. The adherence to a
literal interpretation of sacred texts and the engagement in subjective practices such as prayer are recognized
as significant components of religiosity[33].
Individuals who exhibit higher levels of religiosity, often measured through indicators such as church
attendance or composite measures, and hold more conservative or fundamentalist theological beliefs, often
assessed through biblical literalism or self-identification as “born again,” tend to express opposition towards
sexuality[1,2,4]. In contrast, younger people were does not take their religious teaching too literal[34].
Attitudinal change trends are not uniform when considering factors such as generations, religious identity,
religious involvement, belief, or subjective spirituality. In the last decade, belief systems and thoughts by
generations shifted[15,35]. Specifically, individuals belonging to younger birth cohorts, specifically the
Millennials and Generation X, exhibit a higher level of acceptance towards same-sex marriage when compared
to their counterparts from older cohorts and Millennial cohort exhibits a lower frequency of attendance at
religious services compared to their counterparts from the baby boom cohort when they were at the same age[33].
According to Philippines Social Science Center, Filipino youth population holds firm convictions
regarding the existence of a God, the concepts of sin, the belief of an afterlife in the form of heaven, and
resurrection[36]. However, the adherence of young Filipinos to the teachings of their religion in expressing their
perspectives on moral matters is not consistent. In terms of divorce, abortion, homosexuality, the utilization of
contraceptives, and premarital sexual activity, the younger generation believed that the perspectives held by
the church on various matters are outdated[24,36].
3. Methods
This study used a qualitative design as the appropriate scheme for uncovering deeper extraction of
experience and descriptions[37]. This study extracted the narratives from religious people, i.e., pastor, Muslim
and Christian students, lector. These narratives shed light on the different aspects of same-sex and how people
from specific demographic react and perceive this issue. Qualitative analysis essentially provides in-depth
investigation on the concepts and ideas related to a topic of interest.
4. Participants
The study used purposive sampling, which includes, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer
(LGBTQ) and religious people. Purposive sampling is a form of non-probability sampling that deliberately
selects participants based on specific characteristics and qualities[37,38]. The participants were chosen to
represent specific group of people which can therefore give demographic-sensitive results[39]. Purposive
sampling enabled the researchers to randomly select participants coming from specific demographics using
pre-determined criteria. There were 16 participants who participated in the one-on-one interview. Researcher
also collected their demographics as presented in the Table 1 below.
Table 1. Participant’s profile.
Participants
Profile
1
Male, 20 years old, imam
2
Male, 24 years old, college student
3
Female, 19 years old, college student
4
Female, 25 years old, lector in Tugbungan Church

Environment and Social Psychology | doi: 10.54517/esp.v9i1.1912
4
Table 1. (Continued).
Participants
Profile
5
Male (bisexual), 29 years old, college student
6
Male (bisexual), 21 years old, college student
7
Male (gay), 24 years old, college student
8
Male (gay), 23 years old, graduate of BPED
9
Female, 20 years old, college student
10
Male, 40 years old, pastor
11
Male, 35 years old, Christian
12
Female, 20 years old, Christian
13
Male (gay), 25 years old, Christian
14
Female, 37 years old, lector
15
Male, 19 years old, regular church visitor
16
Female (lesbian), 25 years old, government worker
5. Instrument
The participants of the study were interviewed using the guide questions presented in Table 2. These
guide questions enabled the researchers to extract responses relevant to the objective of the study. In
developing the guide questions, researchers should allow participants to share their thoughts and develop
prompts for further questions[40]. The questions represent the concept of the study and how results can be
connected through theme.
Table 2. Research instruments.
Objective
Interview set for question 1
Interview set for question 2
Determine argument of religious
people supporting same sex
relationship.
1) Do you support same sex relationship?
Why?
2) Considering yourself as a religious person do
you still support same sex relationship? And why?
6. Research procedure
The researchers seek for permission from the participants. Written in the consent were the objective of
the study, purpose, terms for confidentiality, use of data, distribution, and voluntary clause for participation.
Once the participants agreed onto the terms, a schedule for electronic (phone call) one-on-one interview was
assigned based on their convenience.
In analyzing the results, thematic analysis was done. Thematic analysis is a general form of quantitative
analysis that delve into different themes and patterns in the responses[41,42]. Thematic analysis enabled the
researchers to analyze patterns in the responses and code them into meaningful and substantial narrative
interpretations.
7. Results
This study provided insights on how religious people support the same-sex relationship. Essentially, the
participants understand the concept of same-sex relationship as a general term used to describe a type of
relationship of two people of the same sex. The narratives of the participants indicated that some religious
people support same-sex relationship. Remarkably, this study was also able to collect data from non-supporters
of same-sex relationship to compare their notions and ideas in relation to some religious and social perspectives.

Environment and Social Psychology | doi: 10.54517/esp.v9i1.1912
5
7.1. Religious systems
Three of the participants believed that same-sex relationship is against the law of God. As one participant
explained, their religion only permits man-woman relationship which manifest their strong religious perception.
They believed that same-sex relationship “constitutes a sin” based on their religious perceptions. For some
against the same-sex relationship, it is something that contradict the teachings of the Bible.
“In my opinion, I do not support same-sex relationships because I adhere to the teachings of my religion,
which state that men are for women only and that failing to do so constitutes a sin.” [Participant 4].
“I will not support the organization of LGBT but I’m willing to help them change by sharing the gospel
of God and to make them realize sharing gospel of God can help change person.” [Participant 11].
In comparison, some religious people manifested support to same-sex relationship even with their
religious perceptions. For instance, one participant explained that the essence of a religion is to connect people,
accept them, and care for them regardless of their sexuality.
“I think that religion is not about what the Bible says, there is something in it that we find it difficult to
understand.” [Participant 7].
“It is not about who you love but it’s how you love someone. Religion wants us to realize that we can be
with someone, we can love someone, accept them, and care for them.” [Participant 13].
“Regardless of our belief system, God is very forgiving. He knows our genuine feeling to someone. This
is I think the most important thing to remember.” [Participant 1].
“For me, it’s not about your religion that matters. It talks about how you live. But I strongly believe that
God accepts you for who you are, regardless of your sexuality.” [Participant 5].
7.2. Social systems
Some of the religious people were against of same-sex relationship because it represents “bad behavior”
of people. They oppose same-sex relationship in the context of displaying affections in public areas. They
believed that same-sex relationship displays negative emotions and bad actions, especially when people see
them doing these. Essentially, this perception relates to how people support one’s action based on how other
people perceived that certain action as good or bad. This then led them to choose their stance in relation to
what other people believe things should be.
“I oppose because I don’t enjoy witnessing bad behavior, such as kissing because people’s perceptions
about it was not nice.” [Participant 15].
In contrast, most of religious people expressed support to same-sex relationship in the context of social
perception. For instance, one person explained that same-sex relationship also relates to gender equality
because it is a valid reason to love someone regardless of their gender. Some also reflect on love and acceptance
with highlight on one’s limitations of what to do.
“Yes, I do support same sex relationship probably it’s because I know that they have valid reason for
them to love one another even though they’re in the same gender. It also has relation to gender equality.”
[Participant 3].
“Yes, because they have all the rights to love and to be loved. For as long as they know their limitation.”
[Participant 14].

Environment and Social Psychology | doi: 10.54517/esp.v9i1.1912
6
“Yes, I do support same sex relationship because we all know that in this generation same sex relationship
and marriage are very common, we can’t deny the fact that this generation indeed change the people’s own
perspective especially when it comes love.” [Participant 3].
“For me, it’s vital to remember that everyone has the right to their own ideas and values, and it’s up to
each person to decide how they feel about same-sex partnerships. It is also critical to respect all people’s
rights and dignity, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.” [Participant 12].
“Love is a central principle in many religious teachings, emphasizing compassion, empathy, and
acceptance. Recognizing the power of love allows for the possibility of affirming and supporting same-sex
relationships within a religious context. Love can transcend boundaries and foster understanding, nurturing
a more inclusive and compassionate faith community.” [Participant 16].
8. Discussion
Most of the religious people in this study support the same-sex relationship in the context of religious and
social systems. The narratives provided comparisons between the beliefs and ideas of religious people which
represent an essential recent phenomenon. Most of them support same-sex relationship because it gives them
rights, acceptance, and tolerance to human differences.
One major insight from the narratives was relating same-sex relationship to religious systems. Some
participants thought that same-sex relationship is against the law of God, as what their belief systems taught
them. As one participant explained, “I do not support same-sex relationships because I adhere to the teachings
of my religion.” [Participant 4]. Not supporting same-sex relationship can be attributed to person’s religion[43].
In the study of Suen et al.[43], in Hong Kong, only 17.6% of Christians were supportive to same-sex relationship
and 34.3% of non-religious people support. Religion can be a major factor on why people do not support same-
sex relationship while others, especially those non-religious also do not support because of other causes, like
in this study because of their social belief systems.
With the prevalent hetero-centric norms, Western societies frequently referenced societal and religious
influences as factors motivating gay men to settle into heterosexual marriages[44,45]. The Abrahamic faiths,
specifically Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, are known for their firm belief system against
homosexuality[44,46,47]. This study observed similar message patterns from non-supporters of same-zex
relationship. As one participant explained, the religion teaches that, “Men are for women only and that failing
to do so constitutes a sin.” [Participant 4]. Moral foundations are commonly regarded as intuitive responses
that reflect variations in moral concerns, thereby influencing individuals’ orientations towards specific social
and political ideologies, often categorized as either liberal or conservative[48,49]. This explains why, “I don’t
enjoy witnessing bad behavior, such as kissing because people’s perceptions about it was not nice.”
[Participant 15], because people see same-sex relationship as unnatural and against social norms.
Additionally, some people perceived that being homosexual can be “changed” with religion. For instance,
“Sharing gospel of God can help change the person.” [Participant 10]. This is also related to the concept of
psychotherapy where, as Pargament[50] argued, “Spirituality cannot be separated from psychotherapy…the
spiritual dimension of life is fully interwoven with other life domains.” Psychological studies on spiritual and
religious coping responses indicated that religion and spirituality are beneficial or detrimental and whether
people deal with relationship crises and changes by holding onto or changing values, beliefs, and religious
practices[50,51]. Some religious people perceived same-sex relationship as curable with religious teachings and
belief systems.

Environment and Social Psychology | doi: 10.54517/esp.v9i1.1912
7
In contrast, some religious people were supportive on same-sex relationship explaining, “Religion is not
about what the Bible says, there is something in it that we find it difficult to understand.” [Participant 7]. Based
on the report from Pew Research Center, majority of Catholics (>90%) in European countries, e.g., Netherlands,
Germany, Spain, believed that homosexuality should be accepted by society[52]. In the same study, 80% of
Filipinos believed that homosexuality should be accepted by the society. Religious people in this study
believed that same-sex relationship as a “Valid reason for them to love one another even though they’re in the
same gender.” [Participant 3] and, “They have all the rights to love and to be loved.” [Participant 14]. This
study observed that message patterns naturally relate same-sex relationship to other important social issues
like gender equality, rights, and love.
Religion covers various same-sex practices within its moral framework that can be attributed to the
varying levels of commitment and societal acceptance associated with each practice type. However, the impact
of religious practice and theological beliefs on these practices may vary depending on the specific type of
practice[53]. For instance, some religious people believed that, “It’s up to each person to decide how they feel
about same-sex partnerships.” [Participant 12]. Specifically, this may involve long-term monogamous
relationship rather than short-term erotic or romantic relationship[53–55]. Critically, same-sex relationship, based
on its supporters, emphasize, “Compassion, empathy, and acceptance.” [Participant 16]. This study revealed
that some religious people believed same-sex relationship is also written in religion because its essence is not
just to build a family and have hetero-centric relationship, but to follow moral values regardless of one’s
sexuality.
Discourse analysis indicated that religion could influence how people perceived same-sex relationship.
Some religious people followed the teachings of their religion as is saying, “Man is only for a woman” and,
“Same-sex relationship is a sin.” While other religious people reflect on the moral framework written in
religious teachings explaining, “Same-sex relationship is about loving someone and accepting them”.
Differences on their perspective was prominent, but majority with religious people support same-sex
relationship who naturally relate same-sex relationship to other relevant social issues such as equality,
acceptance, compassion, and tolerance to human differences.
9. Conclusion
The discourse analysis conducted on religious individuals who support gender equality in their same-sex
relationships reveals a complex process of reinterpretation and negotiation of traditional religious beliefs and
values. The attitudes of religious people towards same-sex relationships varied significantly. Some religious
individuals supported same-sex relationships within the context of their religious and social systems,
emphasizing the importance of rights, acceptance, and tolerance for human differences. On the other hand,
there were participants who opposed same-sex relationships based on their belief that it goes against the
teachings of their religion. Religion played a significant role in shaping people’s perceptions of same-sex
relationships. While some religious individuals adhered to traditional teachings, others embraced more
inclusive and accepting attitudes towards same-sex relationships.
Religious beliefs and systems play a significant role in shaping individuals’ attitudes towards same-sex
relationships. While some religious people adhere to traditional teachings that condemn homosexuality, others
reinterpret their faith to support and accept same-sex relationships. This highlights the complexity of religious
influence on social issues, with varying degrees of openness and acceptance within different religious
communities. Religious beliefs can either hinder or facilitate acceptance, depending on how individuals engage
with their faith and its teachings. As societal attitudes continue to evolve, understanding the role of religion in

Environment and Social Psychology | doi: 10.54517/esp.v9i1.1912
8
shaping perspectives on same-sex relationships is essential for fostering dialogue, tolerance, and inclusivity
within diverse religious communities and society at large.
Author contributions
Conceptualization, JVC and CCC; methodology, JVC and CCC; software, JVC and CCC; validation JVC
and CCC; formal analysis, JVC and CCC; investigation, JVC and CCC; resources, JVC and CCC; data curation,
JVC and CCC; writing—original draft preparation, CCC; writing—review and editing, JVC; visualization,
JVC and CCC; supervision, JVC; project administration, JVC; funding acquisition, JVC and CCC. All authors
have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to give credit to the following individuals for their efforts in data-gathering, Jessica
Nasara, Jovin Medina, Al-ghafal Pañia, Fhara Nasilin, Kanrael Jikiri, Rhealyn Orsal, Arfahad Sammara,
Abduhraman Sahipa.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Adamczyk A, Pitt C. Shaping attitudes about homosexuality: The role of religion and cultural context. Social
Science Research 2009; 38(2): 338–351. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2009.01.002
2. Jonathan E. The influence of religious fundamentalism, right-wing authoritarianism, and Christian orthodoxy on
explicit and implicit measures of attitudes toward homosexuals. The International Journal for the Psychology of
Religion 2008; 18(4): 316–329. doi: 10.1080/10508610802229262
3. Perry SL. Multiracial church attendance and support for same‐sex romantic and family relationships. Sociological
Inquiry 2013; 83(2): 259–285. doi: 10.1111/soin.12005
4. Schulte LJ, Battle J. The relative importance of ethnicity and religion in predicting attitudes towards gays and
lesbians. Journal of Homosexuality 2004; 47(2): 127–142. doi: 10.1300/J082v47n02_08
5. Baunach DM. Changing same-sex marriage attitudes in America from 1988 through 2010. Public Opinion
Quarterly 2012; 76(2): 364–378. doi: 10.1093/poq/nfs022
6. Becker AB. 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 2012; 93(4): 1007–1029. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-
6237.2012.00844.x
7. Whitehead AL, Perry SL. Religion and support for adoption by same-sex couples: The relative effects of religious
tradition, practices, and beliefs. Journal of Family Issues 2014; 37(6): 789–813. doi: 10.1177/0192513x14536564
8. Perry SL, Whitehead AL. Religion and public opinion toward same‐sex relations, marriage, and adoption: Does
the type of practice matter? Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 2016; 55(3): 637–651. doi:
10.1111/jssr.12215
9. Burdette AM, Ellison CG, Hill TD. Conservative protestantism and tolerance toward homosexuals: An
examination of potential mechanisms. Sociological Inquiry 2005; 75(2): 177–196. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-
682x.2005.00118.x
10. Haider-Markel DP, Joslyn MR. Beliefs about the origins of homosexuality and support for gay rights: An
empirical test of attribution theory. Public Opinion Quarterly 2008; 72(2): 291–310. doi: 10.1093/poq/nfn015
11. Merino SM. Contact with gays and lesbians and same-sex marriage support: The moderating role of social context.
Social Science Research 2013; 42(4): 1156–1166. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2013.02.004
12. Perry SL, Whitehead AL. Same-sex adoption as a welfare alternative? Conservatism, neoliberal values, and
support for adoption by same-sex couples. Journal of Homosexuality 2015; 62(12): 1722–1745. doi:
10.1080/00918369.2015.1078209
13. Sherkat DE, de Vries KM, Creek S. Race, religion, and opposition to same‐sex marriage. Social Science Quarterly
2010; 91(1): 80–98. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6237.2010.00682.x
14. Whitehead AL, Baker JO. Homosexuality, religion, and science: Moral authority and the persistence of negative
attitudes. Sociological Inquiry 2012; 82(4): 487–509. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-682x.2012.00425.x

Environment and Social Psychology | doi: 10.54517/esp.v9i1.1912
9
15. Cox, D., Navarro-Rivera, J., & Jones, R. P. (2014). A shifting landscape: A decade of change in American
attitudes about same-sex marriage and LGBT issues. Washinton, DC: Public Religion Research Institute.
16. Olson LR, Cadge W, Harrison JT. Religion and public opinion about same‐sex marriage. Social Science Quarterly
2006; 87(2): 340–360. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6237.2006.00384.x
17. Sherkat DE, Powell-Williams M, Maddox G, de Vries KM. Religion, politics, and support for same-sex marriage
in the United States, 1988–2008. Social Science Research 2011; 40(1): 167–180. doi:
10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.08.009
18. Van Geest F. Changing patterns of denominational political activity in North America: The case of homosexuality.
Review of Religious Research 2007; 49(2): 199–221.
19. Cochrane C. The effects of Islam, religiosity, and socialization on Muslim-Canadian opinions about same-sex
marriage. Comparative Migration Studies 2013; 1(1): 147–178. doi: 10.5117/CMS2013.1.COCH
20. Glas S, Spierings N, Lubbers M, Scheepers P. How polities shape support for gender equality and religiosity’s
impact in Arab countries. European Sociological Review 2019; 35(3): 299–315. doi: 10.1093/esr/jcz004
21. Triadafilopoulos T, Rasheed J. A religion like no other: Islam and the limits of multiculturalism in Canada.
Available online: https://canadacommons.ca/artifacts/1759927/a-religion-like-no-other/2491574/ (accessed on 25
October 2023).
22. Sherkat DE, Powell-Williams M, Maddox G, de Vries KM. Religion, politics, and support for same-sex marriage
in the United States, 1988–2008. Social Science Research, 40(1), 167-180.
23. Astillero FG, Balderama AJG, Galias ABS, Lacsi WC. Acceptance of homosexuals and legalization of same-sex
marriage. Research and Analysis Journal 2022; 5(4): 1–8. doi: 10.18535/raj.v5i4.290
24. Tabora RC, Tee KRR, Villanueva JD, Bernarte RP. The religious practices of youth and its relation to their
attitude on same-sex marriage. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research 2016; 4(2): 57–64.
25. Rae S, Wong KL. Beyond Integrity: A Judeo-Christian Approach to Business Ethics. Harper Collins; 2009.
26. Morales B. Same-Sex Marriage and Christian Ethics: Seeking Truth Among Opposing Cultures and Theologies.
Azusa Pacific University; 2015. pp. 1–27.
27. Kronen JD, Reitan EH. Homosexuality, misogyny, and God’s plan. Faith and Philosophy 1999; 16(2): 213–232.
doi: 10.5840/faithphil199916216
28. Pietkiewicz IJ, Kołodziejczyk-Skrzypek M. Living in sin? How gay Catholics manage their conflicting sexual and
religious identities. Archives of Sexual Behavior 2016; 45(6): 1573–1585. doi:10.1007/s10508-016-0752-0
29. Shoko T. “Worse than dogs and pigs?” Attitudes toward homosexual practice in Zimbabwe. Journal of
Homosexuality 2010; 57(5): 634–649. doi: 10.1080/00918361003712087
30. Barringer MN, Gay DA, Lynxwiler JP. Gender, religiosity, spirituality, and attitudes toward homosexuality.
Sociological Spectrum 2013; 33(3): 240–257. doi: 10.1080/02732173.2013.732903
31. Ford TE, Brignall T, VanValey TL, Macaluso MJ. The unmaking of prejudice: How Christian beliefs relate to
attitudes toward homosexuals. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 2009; 48(1): 146–160. doi:
10.1111/j.1468-5906.2009.01434.x
32. Rule S. Religiosity and quality of life in South Africa. Social Indicators Research 2007; 81(2): 417–434. doi:
10.1007/s11205-006-9005-2
33. Gay DA, Lynxwiler JP, Smith P. Religiosity, spirituality, and attitudes toward same-sex marriage: A cross-
sectional cohort comparison. Sage Open 2015; 5(3): 2158244015602520. doi: 10.1177/2158244015602520
34. Gay DA, Lynxwiler JP. Cohort, spirituality, and religiosity: A cross-sectional comparison. The Journal of Religion
& Society 2013.
35. Taylor P. The Next America: Boomers, Millennials, and the Looming Generational Showdown. PublicAffairs;
2016.
36. Arnett JJ. Adolescent Psychology Around the World. Psychology Press. 2012.
37. Chavez JV, Adalia HG, Alberto JP. Parental support strategies and motivation in aiding their children learn the
English language. Forum for Linguistic Studies 2023; 5(2): 1541. doi: 10.59400/fls.v5i2.1541
38. Chavez JV, Lamorinas DD, Ceneciro CC. Message patterns of online gender-based humor, discriminatory
practices, biases, stereotyping, and disempowering tools through discourse analysis. Forum for Linguistic Studies
2023; 5(2): 1535. doi: 10.59400/fls.v5i2.1535
39. Calaro MF, Vicente MB, Chavez JV, et al. Marketing campaigns leading to the purchase of accommodation
products: A content analysis. Journal of Namibian Studies: History Politics Culture 2023; 33: 4221–4236. doi:
10.59670/jns.v33i.2696
40. Mendoza DV. Analysis of the Filipino brand of customer service in the accommodation sector. Journal of
Namibian Studies 2023; 33: 4685–4704.
41. Aguirre JKC, Vicente MB, Chavez JV, et al. Content analysis of consumer reviews on preferred characteristics of
accommodation products. Journal of Namibian Studies: History Politics Culture 2023; 33: 4264–4286. doi:
10.59670/jns.v33i.2717

Environment and Social Psychology | doi: 10.54517/esp.v9i1.1912
10
42. Duhaylungsod AV, Chavez JV. ChatGPT and other AI Users: Innovative and creative utilitarian value and mindset
shift. Journal of Namibian Studies 2023; 33: 4367–4378. doi: 10.59670/jns.v33i.2791
43. Suen YT, Wong EMY, Chan RCH. Relationship between religion and public attitudes toward same-sex marriage:
Examining the role of traditional Chinese religions through a case study of Hong Kong. Sexuality Research and
Social Policy 2023. doi: 10.1007/s13178-023-00836-w
44. Coleman E. Bisexual and gay men in heterosexual marriage: Conflicts and resolutions in therapy. Journal of
Homosexuality 1982; 7(2–3): 93–103. doi: 10.1300/j082v07n02_11
45. Ortiz ET, Scott PR. Gay husbands and fathers: Reasons for marriage among homosexual men. Journal of Gay &
Lesbian Social Services 1994; 1(1): 59–72. doi.org/10.1300/J041v01n01_04
46. Asyraf Zulkffli M, Rashid RA. Discursive strategies employed by homosexual Malaysian Muslim men in talking
about homosexuality in Islam. Discourse & Society 2019; 30(3): 307–320. doi: 10.1177/0957926519828032
47. Kissil K, Itzhaky H. Experiences of the marital relationship among orthodox Jewish gay men in mixed-orientation
marriages. Journal of GLBT Family Studies 2015; 11(2): 151–172. doi: 10.1080/1550428x.2014.900659
48. Haidt J, Graham J, Joseph C. Above and below left-right: Ideological narratives and moral foundations.
Psychological Inquiry 2009; 20(2–3): 110–119. doi: 10.1080/10478400903028573
49. Haidt J, Graham J. When morality opposes justice: Conservatives have moral intuitions that liberals may not
recognize. Social Justice Research 2007; 20(1): 98–116. doi: 10.1007/s11211-007-0034-z
50. Pargament KI, Saunders SM. Introduction to the special issue on spirituality and psychotherapy. Journal of
Clinical Psychology 2007; 63(10): 903–907. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20405
51. Coulter MJ. Spiritual care of gay men in committed relationships: An evidenced-based intercultural approach.
Electronic Theses and Dissertations 1907.
52. Diamant J. How Catholics around the world see same-sex marriage, homosexuality. Available online:
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/11/02/how-catholics-around-the-world-see-same-sex-marriage-
homosexuality/ (accessed on 10 July 2023).
53. Perry SL, Whitehead AL. Religion and public opinion toward same‐sex relations, marriage, and adoption: Does
the type of practice matter? Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 2016; 55(3): 637–651. doi:
10.1111/jssr.12215
54. Elie JE, Mathevon N, Vignal C. Same-sex pair-bonds are equivalent to male-female bonds in a life-long socially
monogamous songbird. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2011; 65(12): 2197–2208. doi: 10.1007/s00265-
011-1228-9
55. Whitton SW, Weitbrecht EM, Kuryluk AD. Monogamy agreements in male same-sex couples: Associations with
relationship quality and individual well-being. Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy 2015; 14(1): 39–63. doi:
10.1080/15332691.2014.953649