Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by mrpg on Monday April 15 2019, @12:18AM   Printer-friendly
from the thank-you-jesus! dept.

For the first time "No Religion" has topped a survey of Americans' religious identity, according to a new analysis by a political scientist. The non-religious edged out Catholics and evangelicals in the long-running General Social Survey.

Ryan Burge, a political scientist at Eastern Illinois University and a Baptist pastor, found that 23.1% of Americans now claim no religion.

Catholics came in at 23.0%, and evangelicals were at 22.5%.

The three groups remain within the margin of error of each other though, making it a statistical tie. Over 2,000 people were interviewed in person for the survey.

[...] "We are seeing the rise of a generation of Americans who are hungry for facts and curious about the world," she says.

There are now as many Americans who claim no religion as there are evangelicals and Catholics, a survey finds

-- submitted from IRC


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by Thexalon on Monday April 15 2019, @03:12AM (27 children)

    by Thexalon (636) on Monday April 15 2019, @03:12AM (#829612)

    We need more hard-core Christians willing to fight to save western civilization.

    Are we talking about the same "western civilization" that was formulated by pagans in the Roman Empire? The "western civilization" fed massive amounts of scientific knowledge from the Muslim Caliphates that led to a rediscovery and massive boom in interest in that pagan thought? The "western civilization" that experienced another boom in science and major political reforms by rejecting Christianity in the early 19th century?

    These hard-core Christians reject some pretty fundamental changes in modern society, such as the theory of evolution and the closely related development of vaccines and DNA testing. They generally refuse to even acknowledge all that history I just laid out above. So what exactly are they willing to fight to save here?

    My own experience, for whatever that's worth: There are truly wonderful and kind people in every group of folks, including in every major religion in existence. There are also truly dangerous and terrible people in every group of folks, including in every major religion. People adhering to every major branch of religion known to humanity has made major contributions to science and enlightenment, and likewise people adhering to every major branch of religion known to humanity has perpetrated war and genocide in the name of their religion. So I'm not sure what exactly Team Western Civ thinks it's fighting for, but I'm quite certain that at least some percentage of Team Western Civ are people that are thoroughly destined for Hell if such a thing exists.

    --
    The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +4  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=2, Informative=1, Total=4
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @03:32AM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @03:32AM (#829617)

    The people who say men are the same as women, or people/cultures are all equally suited for every environment are the ones who deny "evolution". And there is UN directive that's states essentially that.

      And evolution has nothing to do with vaccine development or DNA tresting, you seem unfamiliar with the claims. Also, many heroes of scientists believed in God, eg Isaac Newton.

    Personally I refuse to ever set foot in any type of cult building ever again. Not for weddings, funerals, nothing. But that doesn't change the fact your narrative is false.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @04:40AM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @04:40AM (#829648)

      Evolution has everything to do with vaccine development and DNA testing. Researchers need to follow the evolutionary changes of the pathogens closely. If they don't, they cannot properly aim the vaccine at antibody binding sites. If they pick the wrong site, one mutation can render the vaccine useless. Evolution also informs the epidemiological trends of what diseases pop up when.

      As for DNA testing, you can't really understand where groups come from without also factoring in the changes of allele frequencies in populations through time (i.e. the definition of evolution). If you want to talk more narrowly, it also helps because children don't get exact duplicates of their parent's DNA, but rather their own mutations. Thus, proper understanding of evolution helps even in the case of simple parental inheritance testing.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @05:25AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @05:25AM (#829666)

        I did medical research and evolution was totally tangential to it. God/aliens created different species that genetically vary within a survivable range and reused the same general patterns across species. For all practical purposes that is the exact same thing for 99% of medical research.

        The only people who think evolution is a big deal for something like vaccines have never actually done that work.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @11:01PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @11:01PM (#830153)

          So, you did medical research and didn't give any attention to how the pathogen populations change over time? Not only that, but 99% of the researchers don't either? Guess I've been wrong this whole time. Since evolution doesn't matter, I await your insights as to why there is no vaccine for HIV, or why they do a different flu vaccine every year.

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by NotSanguine on Monday April 15 2019, @04:51AM (16 children)

    You're spot on there.

    Not that I expect any of the reactionary ACs (who don't have enough courage of their convictions to even use a pseudonym) blathering on about things in which they have no intellectual grounding, but here are a few resources (as accessible starting points) that can give folks a better understanding of what Western Civilization was and is, which is important because it gives us powerful guidance on where it may be going:

    Civilization: The West And The Rest [wikipedia.org], by Niall Ferguson
    [TV miniseries [pbs.org]]

    Guns, Germs And Steel [wikipedia.org], by Jared Diamond

    The Western Tradition [youtube.com], by Eugen Weber

    I can understand why folks with limited intellectual capacity wouldn't investigate and educate themselves. But there is no excuse for willful ignorance from those who should know better. More's the pity.

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @05:32AM (3 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @05:32AM (#829671)

      Hilarious that you think you are so much smarter than other people just because you quote from a different set of government funded holy books. And I am way more anti religion than you, I assure you.

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Monday April 15 2019, @05:51AM

        Hilarious that you think you are so much smarter than other people just because you quote from a different set of government funded holy books. And I am way more anti religion than you, I assure you.

        I don't think I'm so much smarter than other folks.

        However, I'm not willfully ignorant and trollish like you. It's unclear as to whether your condition is a result of limited intellectual capacity, although I suspect it's more likely that you have Hunter S. Thompson Disease [harpers.org]:

        The disease is fatal. There is no known cure. The most we can do for the poor devil, it seems to me, is to name his disease in his honor. From this moment on, let all those who feel that Americans can be as easily led to beauty as to ugliness, to truth as to public relations, to joy as to bitterness, be said to be suffering from Hunter Thompson’s disease.

        And I don't really care what you think or believe. My suggestions weren't for you anyway, as explicitly mentioned in my post.

        Have the courage of your convictions. Or don't. It's no skin off my nose either way,.

        --
        No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
      • (Score: 1, TouchĂ©) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @08:18AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @08:18AM (#829734)

        No, I piss farther.

        • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @07:55PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @07:55PM (#829994)

          No, you don't. You are also more stupid. And you care less. And you smell bad. Trump voter.

    • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday April 15 2019, @05:42AM (6 children)

      by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday April 15 2019, @05:42AM (#829677) Journal

      Their problem is low WIS, not low INT. Basically, they're doing science bass-ackwards, starting with a conclusion and looking for supporting data (and no, the kinds of "scientific" racism we see here are NOT Bayesian methods...).

      --
      I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
      • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Monday April 15 2019, @05:56AM (5 children)

        Their problem is low WIS, not low INT. Basically, they're doing science bass-ackwards, starting with a conclusion and looking for supporting data (and no, the kinds of "scientific" racism we see here are NOT Bayesian methods...).

        I'm sure you have a wonderful point there Azuma. However, it was kind of spoiled for me without appropriate context.

        What, pray tell, do the terms "WIS" and "INT" represent?

        --
        No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
        • (Score: 4, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday April 15 2019, @06:12AM (4 children)

          by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday April 15 2019, @06:12AM (#829696) Journal

          Ah, sorry. Funny for someone who's never played D&D to use so much of the terminology, huh? Basically, those are two separate stats, INTelligence and WISdom. I've heard it explained as "Intelligence is knowing a tomato is technically a fruit; wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad despite knowing that."

          --
          I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Monday April 15 2019, @06:36AM (3 children)

            Ah, sorry. Funny for someone who's never played D&D to use so much of the terminology, huh? Basically, those are two separate stats, INTelligence and WISdom. I've heard it explained as "Intelligence is knowing a tomato is technically a fruit; wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad despite knowing that."

            Thanks! Things make a lot more sense now.

            I don't disagree with you, but I long ago identified three broad groups:
            1. Those who don't have strong intellectual capacity (not so smart);
            2. Those who have a reasonable amount of intellectual capacity and use it learn, understand and interpret the world around them (smart);
            3. Those who have a reasonable amount intellectual capacity, but for whatever reason choose not to learn or understand the world around them (willfully ignorant)

            People in categories 1 and 2 are generally pretty decent folks. However, folks in category 3 are usually opinionated, closed-minded and generally unpleasant.

            At the same time, your point brings to mind an insightful bit from The Books of Bokonon [wikipedia.org]:

            Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way.

            --
            No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
            • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday April 15 2019, @06:18PM (2 children)

              by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday April 15 2019, @06:18PM (#829961) Journal

              We are drowning in Type 3s. KHallow is one of the single worst offenders on the side; he seems to take some kind of perverse pleasure in refusing to use his considerable intelligence for the benefit of anyone but himself, and not even his own long-term benefit at that. He's convinced he's right about everything, which means he's stagnating; none of his base assumptions are open to change. From an impregnable fortress of ignorance (think "pillow fort made of his own compacted feces") he rains down bullshit on the rest of us.

              --
              I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
              • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 23 2019, @06:36AM (1 child)

                by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 23 2019, @06:36AM (#833739)

                You judge him as wrong, and thus willfully ignorant, ignoring that possibility that you are wrong and willfully ignorant.

                FYI, about 80% of your opinions are clearly wrong. Much of the rest might also be wrong.

                • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday April 23 2019, @10:15PM

                  by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday April 23 2019, @10:15PM (#834067) Journal

                  Saying it doesn't make it so. I've pointed out where he is wrong, why he is wrong, and how he is wrong. While no one is perfect, and I would certainly never claim to *never* be wrong, I'm one king hell mountain of a lot less wrong than him.

                  --
                  I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @12:55PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @12:55PM (#829785)

      I'm sorry for the annoyance of not being able to launch personal attacks on one of us Anonymous Cowards. If it is any comfort we never get credit when we say something wise.

    • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday April 15 2019, @02:41PM (1 child)

      by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Monday April 15 2019, @02:41PM (#829836) Homepage
      I mostly enjoyed Niall's telly programs, I had a few issues with his approach, and my g/f who's better read in history and social anthropology than me (by 3 degrees) had incomparably more issues. Not necessarily in what was actually being said, but what was being missed out. I wish I could remember specific examples, but it was several years ago. It was still on the "interesting watch" side of the divide, rather than "poor", though, don't get me wrong.
      --
      Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
      • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Monday April 15 2019, @03:37PM

        I mostly enjoyed Niall's telly programs, I had a few issues with his approach, and my g/f who's better read in history and social anthropology than me (by 3 degrees) had incomparably more issues. Not necessarily in what was actually being said, but what was being missed out. I wish I could remember specific examples, but it was several years ago. It was still on the "interesting watch" side of the divide, rather than "poor", though, don't get me wrong.

        Honestly, I haven't seen the television programs. That said, I'm sure plenty was left out. After all, it was just two programs.

        I'm currently in the middle of reading the book, which also glosses over a lot, but I'm sure it's better than the television bit.

        I put the links to the TV stuff because, sadly, so many folks just don't read books anymore.

        As I mentioned in my comment, the links I provided are accessible starting points not intended to be really comprehensive.

        Guns, Germs and Steel is likewise not comprehensive and focuses on specific historical and technological areas which are both interesting and provides some context around western domination of the world.

        Both Ferguson and Diamond attempt (and somewhat successfully -- at least in their books) to elucidate how the west managed to dominate most of the rest of the world starting around the fifteenth century. They're attempting to address specific areas of western culture, technology and political thought using a narrative format that (IMHO) makes it more accessible to the lay person.

        Likewise, The Western Tradition, which is also not meant to be comprehensive, gives a broad brush across the last 7-10,000 years. It does (again, IMHO) give a really nice overview (in 52 ~30 minute episodes) of western civilization. As a broad, but shallow exploration, it's rather well done.

        I'm sure your g/f would agree that if you really want a deep dive into the history of western civilization, you'll spend years reading dozens, if not hundreds, of books of the academic variety.

        Based on your usage (not just in this comment, but others I've seen as well), I suspect you're in the UK (or if not, are from there). I'm not sure how much history is taught there, but in the US, history education is abysmal. That's why I suggested these works. Shamefully, most Americans have a really poor understanding of the cultural, political and philosophical underpinnings of our society. More's the pity.

        --
        No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @06:34PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @06:34PM (#829969)

      Guns, Germs, and Steel is jew propaganda against the Aryan, so STFU.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 16 2019, @12:54AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 16 2019, @12:54AM (#830198)

        Nope. Not gonna be quiet.

        You ignore science, rationality and the evidence of your own eyes.

        As such, I look forward to the day when you are replaced. Hopefully with some hot Asian, African or Hispanic girl.

        Keep tilting at windmills moron. The *human* race has no use for scum like you.

        And since you're probably too stupid to understand what I'm saying, I'll use small words so you'll be sure to understand, you warthog-faced buffoon:
        We will replace you. And the sooner the better, asshole!

  • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday April 15 2019, @12:30PM (5 children)

    by Phoenix666 (552) on Monday April 15 2019, @12:30PM (#829775) Journal

    You're over-simplifying some things, and ignoring others to support your contention that all cultures are equal. The information the Muslim Caliphates transmitted to Europe was originally Greek and Roman for the most part, and was preserved while Europe experienced its Dark Ages. They did invent algebra, though, which the Europeans ran with.

    Likewise you're conveniently leaving out the Reformation and the Enlightenment, which were very much based in Christianity. If you've ever been to the Uffizi in Florence the place is replete with a million depictions of the Crucifixion. The Sistine Chapel is in the Vatican, for Pete's sake, and its focus is God passing the divine spark to Adam.

    Newton and Adam Smith, two towering intellects often cited by science and capitalism fans, were devout Christians. Those are just a couple examples.

    I find it regrettable that academia has made such an effort to ellide all those facts, to scrub Europe and its history of its Christianity in order to serve its current secular agenda. It's false, and intellectually bankrupt.

    --
    Washington DC delenda est.
    • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday April 15 2019, @02:48PM

      by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Monday April 15 2019, @02:48PM (#829844) Homepage
      The Enlightenment was very much fighting against the prevailing environment of Christianity that was holding it back.
      --
      Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Monday April 15 2019, @03:40PM (2 children)

      by Thexalon (636) on Monday April 15 2019, @03:40PM (#829882)

      The information the Muslim Caliphates transmitted to Europe was originally Greek and Roman for the most part, and was preserved while Europe experienced its Dark Ages. They did invent algebra, though, which the Europeans ran with.

      Right, so no credit to the Muslims for building the House of Wisdom, preserving Greek and Roman sources while the Christians were burning them in Alexandria, and carefully ignoring their contributions to astronomy and other sciences in addition to mathematics. Heck, many Soylentils make their living thanks to the work, in part, of al-Khwarizmi. I don't think I'm the one being selective here about who did what. Also, I didn't get into this, but it's not like China and India didn't play a big role as well, both in science and technology. For example, those guns we all seem to like wouldn't have happened without Chinese experiments with explosives.

      I'm not concerned with declaring all cultures equal. I am concerned that declaring one culture as inherently superior to others is usually the prelude to "Our culture is superior, so we can and should do whatever we want to other cultures, including rape, pillage, enslave, or murder everyone in them". Even if you don't give a damn about the people in the other cultures, that's still going to entail losses on your side as well as losing a great deal of whatever knowledge those other people might have had.

      And you still haven't explained what exactly you mean by "Western Civilization". Who's in, and who's out? What portions of the former Byzantine Empire count? How about the Egyptians, without whom the Roman Empire could not have functioned? Where do the north Africans such as the Moors fit into this? How about the Russians, and if they're in how come the Mongols aren't? When it comes to the Levant and Jerusalem in particular, when is that part of Western Civ and when isn't it, and why?

      --
      The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
      • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday April 17 2019, @10:41AM (1 child)

        by Phoenix666 (552) on Wednesday April 17 2019, @10:41AM (#830949) Journal

        Your premise was to excise Christianity as a motivating force in the development of Western civilization, and to cast it as something that had to be fought and eliminated in order for human progress to be achieved. Finally, you concluded with cultural relativism.

        Christianity both opposed, and promoted progress in the West, depending on exactly, who, when, and where we're talking about. But it absolutely cannot be excised as a motivating force, and it's reductive and intellectually suspect to cram it into a negative one. It smacks of an agenda driven not by cold, factual historical analysis but by an ideological one. It has the stamp of post-Modernist academe all over it.

        Cultural relativism is another fad that has had its day, but we can let the discursive tides wash it back out to sea like the intellectual flotsam and jetsam it is. Cultures are not all equal. Some produce better material outcomes than others. Western culture has produced far better material outcomes for the world. Its products, democracy, science, medicine, industrialization, and many others have made it possible for billions of people to even exist in the rest of the world. Japanese bushido, as intricate and interesting as it is, has not done so. India's yoga, as great as it is, has not done so. In fact it's thanks to the superior outcomes made possible by Western culture that those elements of Japanese and Indian culture (and others, of course) are even known to the rest of the world, so not only has Western culture proven its superiority through its direct aid, but by amplifying the impact of other, local, non-Western cultures.

        Now, Western culture has not always been superior, because it wasn't. Nor may it always be, because things change. And saying its superior now does not mean that no other cultures have value and are not worthy of preservation or existence. But it for sure says that Western culture is worthy of defense, that it ought not be pooh-poohed, denigrated, or torn down by hapless youths who have no conception of the vast inheritance they sit atop.

        --
        Washington DC delenda est.
        • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday April 17 2019, @01:26PM

          by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday April 17 2019, @01:26PM (#830999)

          But it for sure says that Western culture is worthy of defense, that it ought not be pooh-poohed, denigrated, or torn down by hapless youths who have no conception of the vast inheritance they sit atop.

          Again, you have refused to define "Western culture". Either you don't know what it is you're trying to defend here, or you don't want to say what it is.

          But more to the point: I have several people in my own family tree that are legitimately notable enough to merit Wikipedia articles. Some of them even played significant roles in human history. And do you know what that means for me and my legacy? Jack squat! My legacy is my own actions, my own work, and my own accomplishments. If I'm not claiming credit for their actions (and I shouldn't - I had little to nothing to do with their actions), why the heck would I claim any kind of legacy for what people far less connected to me did centuries ago? Your defense of the "inheritance of Western culture" is all about claiming some sort of connection to the actions of people you've never met and had no influence over. Being born a European-descended English-speaker in the United States doesn't suddenly mean that you are strongly connected to Charles Martel's victory over the Muslims in the Battle of Tours in 732 CE.

          If you want to claim a "vast inheritance", why not go with "I'm human, humans have done a whole lot of cool things over the centuries that have enabled me to live a much better life than my ancestors did"? That gives you a much larger group of giants on whose shoulders you can stand.

          --
          The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by NotSanguine on Monday April 15 2019, @03:57PM

      You're over-simplifying some things, and ignoring others to support your contention that all cultures are equal. The information the Muslim Caliphates transmitted to Europe was originally Greek and Roman for the most part, and was preserved while Europe experienced its Dark Ages. They did invent algebra, though, which the Europeans ran with.

      And you're not giving the Islamic world enough credit. Although they did preserve much Greek and Roman knowledge, they took that knowledge and synthesized significant new knowledge (algebra, as you mentioned -- without which Newton and Liebniz could never have formulated the calculus), as well as significant medical and astronomical discoveries.

      And it's true that after centuries of advancement and independent thought, the Islamic world turned away from science toward a worldview quite similar to the Christian, anti-science worldview.

      That the Islamic world turned away while the Christian world began to embrace science and independent thought was due to many complex factors, most of which were political and economic in nature, rather than religious.

      I find it regrettable that academia has made such an effort to [sic]ellide all those facts,

      Academia has done no such thing. There is still plenty of good history that has been and continues to be done by academics.

      The problem is that the the *teaching* of history has been severely devalued and the quality of such teaching is horrible. As you make abundantly clear.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr