How State Support of Religion Shapes Attitudes Toward Muslim Immigrants

Abstract

This article argues that governments play a considerable role in shaping citizens’ attitudes toward Muslim immigrants through the way they regulate religion. European democracies are far from secular, and matters of religious regulation cannot be reduced to abstract values or constitutional clauses. Under conditions of high state support of religion, accommodating new religious minorities involves not only the changing of existing rules but also giving up on long-standing traditions and everyday habits. As a result, citizens see religious newcomers as a threat to their way of life and react with animosity to their practices and demands. We support our argument by combining newly designed survey items with original data on religious regulation in 26 Swiss cantons. Our findings contradict the extant literature and have important implications for the democratic challenges in Europe, the quality of modern immigration societies, and the role of religion in democracy more generally.

Refugee integration: Research and policy.

“…A recent study conducted in Switzerland, for example, suggests that when governments that have historically played a strong role in supporting religious practices change their policies toward greater religious openness, they also change their cherished local traditions. The result is that members of religious outgroups are now seen as the cause of these changes and thus a symbolic threat to local values (Helbling & Traunmüller, 2016).…”

Backlash to policy decisions: how citizens react to immigrants' rights to demonstrate

“…Although we aim at taking a more general view at attitudes toward religious migrants, the current literature focuses mostly on Muslim immigrants. As Helbling and Traunmüller (2016: 393) argue, accommodating Muslim immigrants' claims often “involves the changing of existing rules as well as the loss of longstanding traditions, valuable privileges, and maybe even everyday habits.” Some consider Muslims’ cultural beliefs on gender roles or sexuality as incompatible with liberal and secular lifestyles (e.g., Norris and Inglehart, 2004; Sniderman and Hagendoorn, 2007; Saroglou et al, 2009; Van der Noll, 2010; Helbling, 2014). Others argue that Muslim immigration threatens the collective identities in Europe because the latter are deeply rooted in a religious tradition of Christianity (Helbling and Traunmüller, 2016).…”

“…As Helbling and Traunmüller (2016: 393) argue, accommodating Muslim immigrants' claims often “involves the changing of existing rules as well as the loss of longstanding traditions, valuable privileges, and maybe even everyday habits.” Some consider Muslims’ cultural beliefs on gender roles or sexuality as incompatible with liberal and secular lifestyles (e.g., Norris and Inglehart, 2004; Sniderman and Hagendoorn, 2007; Saroglou et al, 2009; Van der Noll, 2010; Helbling, 2014). Others argue that Muslim immigration threatens the collective identities in Europe because the latter are deeply rooted in a religious tradition of Christianity (Helbling and Traunmüller, 2016). As a result, some citizens may view liberal policy decisions, which afford cultural or political rights to Muslim immigrants, as a threat to their own rights and identity.…”

Are Immigrant-Origin Candidates Penalized Due to Ingroup Favoritism or Outgroup Hostility?

“…1 In fact, Switzerland presents the ideal setting for which social psychology literature has advocated to explore the two biases separately (Greenwald & Pettigrew, 2014: 676). The advantages of Switzerland as a setting are further amplified by the fact that it contains a great degree of cultural diversity, both domestic and immigration-driven, with a large number of minority groups (Helbling & Traunmüller, 2016;Strijbis, 2014).…”