The rise of atheism and the non-religious

What religion does that?? I know that Christianity, or at least the version I was taught, fully embraces science. The fact that the moon isn't made of green cheese and that the Earth isn't the center of the universe don't demystify the universe, rather, it reinforces the idea that a brilliant mind beyond the conception of mere mortals painstakingly built it.

Whenever I hear people present this idea that scientific knowledge and religious faith can't coexist, I think of every Abortion discussion which eventually comes to "Well, the science even atheists agree support clearly says life beings at conception." The retorts are then "Well, that doesn't matter," or "Science says that, but doesn't really mean it."

It just seems to me that like so many things, one doesn't necessarily have to preempt the other. Perhaps they can peacefully coexist.

It was an honor

at least in my part of the US, Maxima, a lot of religious people actively assume any and all science that conflicts with their conservative christian worldview is either 1: a lie, 2: Satan at work, or 3: an evil conspiracy.

so something like evolution is at best "untrue because the bible says so" up to "micro-evolution might exist but macro-evolution is a plot by satan to lead people to atheism"

edited 30th Aug '12 10:02:30 AM by Midgetsnowman

And I disagree with them too. And even though — it is true — there are religious people who believe such things (and, what's worse, who lobby to have them taught in science classes), there are a lot of others who do not agree with such things in the least (in Europe, for example, pretty much nobody has any issue with evolution, even in comparatively religious regions.)

It seems to me that, especially in the US, religion suffers very much from a big image problem.

But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas.

actually, I think the problem is the sane religious people don't speak up and aren't obnoxiously shoving their drivel in your face.

@Starship: I really don't know which circles you walk in, because science denial is practically a pillar of faith among evangelicals. Climate change, evolution, you name it, they have the Bible to back them up and they ain't listenin' to a word you say.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

That's a lot like how all the non-obnoxious atheists tend to be the quieter ones.

edited 30th Aug '12 10:05:18 AM by Elfive

I suspect that this is a temporary phenomenon. This current rise in non-religiosity follows a couple decades of rising religiosity (the 1970's-80's), which followed a couple decades of falling religiosity (1950's-1960's), and so on...

Also, don't overlook the effect of politics. I think that conservatives have been so successful at capturing religion for their own agenda that liberals are no longer identifying as religious, even though their theistic beliefs may not have changed all that much.

Here be some facts: Pew study showing generational changes in religiosity since 1987, and the fact that "political differences in levels of religious commitment are larger now than in years past." Also, "As a group, Republicans are somewhat more religious now than they were 20 years ago, but Democrats are less so."

Also, it isn't just religiosity, but traditional social values overall. So what is hurting religion is not a fall in the belief of God, per se, but established religions identification with traditional social values, particularly ones having to do with sex and sexuality.

Yet, despite the recent changes, religiosity has not yet declined to pre-1987 levels. I think this trend will continue another decade or so until the next pendulum swing- sooner if established churches can liberate themselves from movement conservatism (which I believe will happen at some point).

edited 30th Aug '12 1:04:25 PM by DeMarquis

I think there’s a global conspiracy to see who can get the most clicks on the worst lies

@Fighteer

I'm from Texas, and most of the people I know are either Christian or Agnostic. I have only met one person who has told me he thinks evolution is false.

It really depends on who you surround yourself with. Don't assume the loudest people are the majority.

cum

To be fair, I still have to see many "obnoxious" modern atheists picketing funerals or beating up Christians in the name of atheism, though.

Some of them are indeed obnoxious, in my opinion; but I'd definitely take them over people bullying gay teens to suicide and so on. And there are also outspoken atheists (Dawkins, for example, I think) with whom I strongly disagree, but who I don't consider obnoxious or rude in the least.

Perhaps you are right, and "moderate" (I really dislike this term, but you get what I mean) religious people should work harder to make their voice heard. It is a delicate matter — we*

Well, "we" insofar as I may be described as "sane", which may not be much

do not generally like conflicts and loud rhetorics, and typically prefer to state our opinions as private ones rather than work as a movement; but it is perhaps true that we should try to be more outspoken.

edited 30th Aug '12 10:20:13 AM by Carciofus

But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas.

I guess it's the difference between being told "I think your beliefs are kinda stupid" and being told "you're going to be tortured forever when you die".

I suppose the bottom line is that, there are causes of belief. If factors relevant to those causes change, then the amount of belief will change.

That's a ridiculously macro statement. Whether "outgrowing those silly superstitions" or what have you are "causes" for lack of belief or not, well, that's something that's hard to prove.

I would suggest that if religiosity declines with cultural influences no longer forcing them to the forefront, that suggests that there is no "native" tendency to pursue religiosity, but instead it is the result of cultural events.

I'd attribute the lack of pro-atheist violence/harassment to the fact that they're a minority, whereas Protestant Christians have been a majority for a long time. If you're part of the majority, you can feel safer doing vocal or bigoted things.

This is probably why the more outspoken anti-religious bigots (Pat Condell, The Amazing Atheist, etc.) tend to spew their drivel online, rather than yelling at people on street corners.

That said, I have seen pictures of anti-religious vandalism, like a church where someone spray painted stuff like "FUCK GOD" and "ATHEIST PRIDE".

cum

Well gee, now I want to ask what the definition of bigotry is, but that'd be a derail :P

Goddamn it Carc, why do you always have to fuck things up with the truth??

It was an honor

Still, as Boredman says, atheists are at the moment a minority. The tendency of a majority group to oppress and harass minorities is quite general, I think, and if atheists ever became a majority I'd guess that at least some of them would end up in a similar pitfall. I have already read people arguing seriously that all religious education to minors should be forbidden as it constitutes a form of "brainwashing", for example (although, I think, the vast majority of atheists nowadays would quite disagree with this.)

edited 30th Aug '12 10:41:15 AM by Carciofus

But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas.

Religious education is an odd one. I went to a Church of England primary school (no separation of church and state here! ...which makes it all the more odd that probably about half the population in this country is what I will nebulously term "non-religious" by this point) and a private school with religious overtones, and none of it ever rubbed off on me. If the Christians in this thread will pardon me, I always found the whole thing a little silly from a very young age. So yes, I think I disagree that a religious education necessarily means brainwashing - though I would favour wholesale secularisation of all schools. Although the Church of England is of course a lot milder than the evangelical types you find more commonly in the US.

edited 30th Aug '12 10:46:58 AM by pagad

With cannon shot and gun blast smash the alien. With laser beam and searing plasma scatter the alien to the stars.

On the other hand, I am in absolute agreement with keeping religious education and state education well apart.

But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas.

I don't like the teaching of non-facts as facts, basically. That's not really dependent upon education being religious or not though.

My reasoning is not "religious education is teh evuls!", but rather giving people a fair shot at deciding what they believe. I'm definitely in favour of retaining Religious Education as a class designed to give people a well-rounded summary of major religions.

With cannon shot and gun blast smash the alien. With laser beam and searing plasma scatter the alien to the stars.

The problem is, kids are really gullible. They'll believe anything an adult tells them without much critical thinking, and a lot of the beliefs they form in childhood get carried over as they mature.

I've got nothing against those who came to religion after serious rational contemplation, but there is a significant percentage who never got that chance. They just blindly follow whatever their parents told them without any thought whatsoever.

Well, American public schools are pretty secular for the most part (excepting certain rural areas), which is double irony since as a country we are more religious that almost anyone else.

I think there’s a global conspiracy to see who can get the most clicks on the worst lies

And that's why teaching critical thinking skills is so important. People should be able to make up their own minds after rational contemplation.

edited 30th Aug '12 11:04:50 AM by Talby

And let us not forget that the Texas GOP platform specifically called for abolishing the teaching of critical thinking skills from the state's curriculum because it might lead to kids questioning the values their parents indoctrinate them with. They struck it out after much controversy, but that's what we're dealing with in the United States.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Yeah, critical thinking is key. If people decide to go for religion X after being trained properly in critical thinking, then that is their right.

To be fair, some objections have been raised that that was just retardedly bad language, and that what they're actually against is "outcome based education."

edited 30th Aug '12 11:06:53 AM by TheyCallMeTomu

I still can't quite get my head around this paradox. Why do some European countries with state religions and even constitutional monarchies in some cases have a lower level of religiosity - to the point where non-religious politicians are routinely elected, an unthinkable prospect in the US - than the allegedly secular United States?

With cannon shot and gun blast smash the alien. With laser beam and searing plasma scatter the alien to the stars.