Authoritarians who endorse nonjudgmental teachings still punish outgroups aggressively.

Evidence

In March 1985, I asked students what they thought of Jesus’ admonition during the Sermon on the Mount, “Do not judge, that you may not be judged. For with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged” (Matthew 7:1). I also asked about Jesus’ resolution of the proposed stoning of the adulteress: “J et he who is without sin among you be the first to cast a stone at her.” Twenty Christian Highs said we should take the teachings literally. Twentyseven other Christian Highs said we should judge and punish others, but none of them explained how they reconciled this view with Jesus’ teachings. Apparently, they “believed” both (contradictory) things. But the kicker came when I looked at various measures of authoritarian aggression I had gathered from these students. No matter what they said they believed, both these groups of Highs were quick with the stones on the Attitudes toward Homosexuals Scale, the Ethnocentrism Scale, and Posse-Homosexuals (EOF, pp. 222-224). — Bob Altemeyer, The Authoritarian Specter, 1221

Categorization

• CANDY: The direct clash between claimed biblical literalism and punitive scores is a vivid, quotable finding.
• XREF: Gives empirical support for the vault’s claim that Christian nationalism’s stated commitments don’t constrain punitive outgroup attitudes.