More bad news for churches - religious believers decline again (hell, America)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Looks like the "nones" are gaining... quickly. Good to see reason is finally making strides and accelerating. Soon hopefully we at least in North America will have relegated those believing in ancient tales to the side lines.
Perhaps the United States will eventually be able to take its place along side the rest of the industrialized world as not being science-deniers, young earth creationists, and fundamentalist Biblical literalists.
What's interesting is how the shouting coming from the religious-right, the shouting that says evolution is bunk, the Big Bang is wrong, gays are an abomination, contraception is bad, and you're going to adhere to the Bible whether you like it or not ...
That shouting is so extremist, so primitive that the younger generations are leaving religion entirely instead of adopting a more liberal approach to Christianity. It just goes to show you what happens when religion is uncompromising and completely off it's rocker. I suppose that's why there are even groups like ISIS to begin with. It's essentially what happens when fundamentalism begins to lose power and membership.
"Back in 1958, only 18 percent of Americans said they would consider voting an Atheist into the Oval office. In 2012, however, that number was up by 36 points to a 54 percent majority."
Athelluijah! In the approved scientific manner, more results need to come in over the next couple of years, but all the results so far are VERY encouraging and none are discouraging.
Perhaps a very significant Olive Branch would be that it is not necessary to become a God -denialist, or even a God -disbeliever, but just a non- religionist. That would do fine.
P.s
I was in two minds whether to post other 'rise in irreligion' links, but I think I will - though some may be out of date. Not to gloat or pretend that We have Won - far from it - yet - but becasue they raise some interesting points.
This one has good points on the continuing distrust of atheists, owing, I am certain, to misunderstanding and bad press. The idea that atheists don't believe in God therefore we have no morality and therefore are Bad is the basic bad press based on misunderstanding.
Strategies for a new era looks at the way atheism is getting organized.
Second para but the one I mention last in the Cold war anti communism that has added patriotic religion to post Confedeate religious fanaticism. When 'In God We Trust' is finally removed from the US currency to which it should never have been applied, then the turning point has been reached.
points up unintentially the argument made by Goldenrule in a past post that the number of atheists is still tiny and irreligious believers is what is increasing.
That is fine with us, as atheism is something of an intellectual position. We really don't mind what people believe, so long as it is kept to themselves. Just as we would be happy to keep our disbelief to ourselves, were it not that organized religion infiltrates society in a way that it should not. It is essential that it becomes understood that atheists, humanists, agnostics and irreligious theists (totalling near 20% of the US) are all on the same side - they have no wish to see organized religion trying to tell people how to run their lives anymore and the differences in the degree to which we doubt God -or not - is an academic issue.
".. the unaffiliated say they are not looking for a religion that would be right for them. Overwhelmingly, they think that religious organizations are too concerned with money and power, too focused on rules and too involved in politics."
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 08-24-2014 at 04:18 AM..
Truly it would be very very fascinating to see how a politican would fare using an atheistic platform to win office. I don't think I may see it in my lifetime. But if it succeeds it would be akin to Kennedy becoming POTUS in spite of his Catholicism!
These surveys are misguiding people; they for instance go to a liberal area often near a college campus and ask few hundred people about their religious affiliation. Christianity is nowhere in decline especially since the rapid immigration growth of Latin Americans of which vast majority are Catholics. Just because people do not attend church regularly does not mean they are not Christians or religious. I see more and more churches expanding or opening than closing down in a liberal area I live in... So don't tell us religion is in decline; it is increasing.
The problem also is that there are too many churches; many could be combined.
These surveys are misguiding people; they for instance go to a liberal area often near a college campus and ask few hundred people about their religious affiliation. Christianity is nowhere in decline especially since the rapid immigration growth of Latin Americans of which vast majority are Catholics. Just because people do not attend church regularly does not mean they are not Christians or religious. I see more and more churches expanding or opening than closing down in a liberal area I live in... So don't tell us religion is in decline; it is increasing.
The problem also is that there are too many churches; many could be combined.
Can you substantiate that these particular surveys cherry-picked people near college campuses or other liberal enclaves? And even if they consistently did that, how does that negate the trends demonstrated? If what you said were true, it would still demonstrate that unbelief is increasing in the very places where our next generation is readied to take its place in society.
Unless you can demonstrate that you debunked these surveys and how you did so, I am inclined to think you'd rather believe in liberal conspiracies than in actual demographic trends.
As for church openings in your area, have you looked at closings or just openings? Have you examined total membership? And have you established that your local trend is representative of anything broader?
And why are you willing to discount that even most self-identified Christians are not fully (or at all) practicing their faith? Does it really hearten you that people cling to belief in god but not with enough enthusiasm to actually worship him, support his earthly endeavors, and to fellowship with his people? What use is that kind of belief? It's like a sociopath's smile -- it's on his face, but never reaches his eyes.
These surveys are misguiding people; they for instance go to a liberal area often near a college campus and ask few hundred people about their religious affiliation. Christianity is nowhere in decline especially since the rapid immigration growth of Latin Americans of which vast majority are Catholics. Just because people do not attend church regularly does not mean they are not Christians or religious. I see more and more churches expanding or opening than closing down in a liberal area I live in... So don't tell us religion is in decline; it is increasing.
The problem also is that there are too many churches; many could be combined.
I understand your alarm over the trends regarding diminishing Christianity in the US, but you are mistaken. Reputable polling organizations do scientific sampling of populations, not just liberal college campuses.
Second para but the one I mention last in the Cold war anti communism that has added patriotic religion to post Confedeate religious fanaticism. When 'In God We Trust' is finally removed from the US currency to which it should never have been applied, then the turning point has been reached.
I don't know if I'll see that day in my lifetime, but I hope to. I was out the other day and one of our hamburger chains has taken to painting "One Nation, UNDER GOD (HUGE letters on that part), indivisible" on its windows.
...I'm not really "complaining" about it so much (although I'll probably vote with my wallet on it), but it amazes me how many people LOVE it being there merely because "it ticks off lib'ruls" (to be honest, I never even noticed it being there until I heard some patrons say that exact thing). It's no wonder the "indivisible" was in such tiny type compared to the "Under God" part, since apparently so many people love it primarily because of how it divides. I suspect many would be more comfortable with removal of the word "indivisible" from the pledge before "under God."
It constantly amazed me that as a country, such a large number of people are making it about religious primacy while totally missing out on the fact that a saying/pledge/motto including the term "indivisible" is being used to divide, and that a significant number of citizens who are NOT "under God" are being excluded ...especially when the original pre-Cold war motto was "Out of many ...one."
If we're going to have a national motto ...it should reflect the entire nation rather than merely "most" of it. Personally, I'm not offended by the "under God" statements in the least, but the literal PRIDE in being intentionally divisive is almost perverse given (for right or wrong) the original intent behind them.
It's no wonder the "indivisible" was in such tiny type compared to the "Under God" part, since apparently so many people love it primarily because of how it divides. I suspect many would be more comfortable with removal of the word "indivisible" from the pledge before "under God." ... Personally, I'm not offended by the "under God" statements in the least, but the literal PRIDE in being intentionally divisive is almost perverse given (for right or wrong) the original intent behind them.
Well, the conceit of believers here is similar to their hijacking societal morality and claiming to have invented it (or more exactly, that god invented it and handed it down on high). Here they hijack the idea of national identity, claiming it will evaporate if that identity is not rooted in their god-beliefs. This is, itself, a claim that this identity was handed down from on high, that it exists at the behest and pleasure of an imaginary guy in the sky.
The truth is that our national identity is based on our shared experiences, which increasingly are not exclusively Christian, much less literalist / fundamentalist Christian. Fundamentalism says, in effect, that there is NO basis for our corporate national identity other than their particular view of god, which of course is the CORRECT view. What they will deny to the end is that their view is ONE view, with an EQUAL right to be (dis)believed relative to MANY OTHER views. They fantasize about a "Christian nation" congealed around their particular doctrine.
Sometimes I would like to wave a magic wand and give them what they ask for. And then watch the evangelicals duke it out with the pentecostals, the pentecostals with the charismatics, the dispensationalists with the hyperdispensationalists, the Calvinists with the Arminians, the Amish with the Mennonites, and so forth, none of them willing to compromise or give one inch because they equate compromise with denying their faith.
They should be careful what they ask for.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
