CBS Washington: Study: One-Third of Adults Under 30 Have No Religious Affiliation

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alexey

There is also an issue of outright lies and deceptions. I recently had a conversation with a young guy who invited me to his church. We had a quick discussion that touched on evolution - and he gladly shared all the traditional arguments about scientists having faith in evolution, watchmaker, etc.

So I do not know about the approach of getting relevant to people, but not shamelessly lying to kids would be a great start.

---

I agree that churches need to stop fighting science and embrace it. But I think this really comes from the perversion of politics. The source of opposition to evolution is as much centered in political belief as it is religious belief. This manifests itself much worse in prosperity gospel or other blatant attempts to bend religion to the will of political expedience.

Quote:

---

btw, as far as I could tell, they got him when he had some issues with substance abuse. Preying on vulnerable people, helping them, and then filling their minds with lies and deceptions. boo.

The whole model of churches providing social support is severely outdated. It may work in a few lucky cases, but otherwise it fails miserably. It has insufficient coverage, insufficient tools, and it gives vast power to charming crackpots.

---

But for this kid, it helped him with his substance abuse, didn't it? Sure, it came with some baggage, but he certainly believes it was worth it, doesn't he?

One thing I have been thinking about, and is mentioned in the Post article, is that when you replace churches with government as social support, it takes the community out of it. People don't meet on a weekly basis to get updates on how the local homeless shelter is doing when it is run by the government, but they do if it is run by the church. Separating social support from religion has also unfortunately separated social support from the community. If the church is diminished as a civic institution, what is replacing it?

It seems like social services have become more like consumer services provided by a distant government, rather than something the community is coming together to provide. And this seems like a problem to me because people start to see government from a more consumer perspective (What do I get from the government?) rather than a civic institution (What can I contribute to the community?).

Here's a link to the Post article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...478_story.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnyderShrugged

Why not keep your focus on the "real help" for a while rather than on your perspective on the supernatural? You are highly intelligent and very adept at research from what I can tell from your posts. If you applied that same level of investigation towards trying to find the good in religion rather than trying to find the bad, maybe it would help balance your perspective and maybe even help understand more.

There is a ton of "real help" out there to see as examples if you only look

---

I try to see the good and the bad.

Helping people is good.
Spreading beliefs in cruel and barbaric ancient superstitions that are obviously untrue is bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alexey

I try to see the good and the bad.

Helping people is good.
Spreading beliefs in cruel and barbaric ancient superstitions that are obviously untrue is bad.

---

Like I said, you have devoted ample time to #2, why not spend the same learning about #1 now instead? You might just learn something about #2 that you didnt realize in the process.

I agree with DjTj's remarks. I think the bigger public media face of more "colorful" Christians ala Palin, Bachmann, Santorum, or Romney (with people fining out more about some of the things you believe in order to be a committed Mormon) makes many of the more "denominational vague" theistic folks even less likely to identify. I know an increasing number of Catholics (for another example) who are hesitant to openly identify as such these days or otherwise qualify how they identify.

Per alexey: the simple reality is that a great number of good deeds done all over the world are not just done by people claiming a specific religion, but by those whose charitable actions are personally and directly connected to being in accordance with the tenets of that religion (I'm leaving certain psychology angles about "selflessness" and altruism aside). And the "strings attached" that you find troubling tend to vary a great deal from almost non-existent to significant. Now I imagine in your ideal world, the assistance would be offered without any form of any proselytizing.

But without the major religion construct as a whole, the tenets that are a fundamental part of the drivers for the people helping would not be in place, and much of the help would be gone. Agnostics and atheists as individuals can be every bit as ethical, moral, and charitable as the most saintly theist of course, but they simply do not at this point in time organize on the large scale and have the vast resources of numbers and pooled finances as religions (from international all the way down to local congregations pooling funds for missionary work).

Also, what are "lies" to you are not lies to others. Some things (on any topic) can be past reasonable debate in the minds of many an informed and rational person, but a person still taking an opposing view path is not necessarily "lying." In fact, that would be more rare. There are many other terms (many quite deservedly negative in connotation and just fine, depending on the situation) more fitting and linguistically proper. So I'd adjust that if I were you and you seek best credibility for your views, unless you are in a position to know they are actually engaging a behavior that meets that definition.

Hugely life-saving and life-improving things like clean water and medical aid and some schooling (etc etc) seems to me to offset any proposed negatives of proselytizing. So if one comes attached with the other, well, it's not a perfect world, even assuming one finds the attachment unfortunate. And I say this as no fan of the whole "proselytizing" theme, even though I understand it's significance in the Christian faith, especially depending on the denomination and even specific congregation. On the other hand, strong and energetic advocation to others of a POV is what we do in politics and many other matters all the time, so while there's a difference (most of the time), it's not a bad thing to remember---you do it too. :)

As for your "supernatural mumbo jumbo" comment, I will remind you as I would anyone here (literally) that you are responsible for what you post. That comment may be fine fifteen times and even draw a supportive post from a staff member, and then the sixteenth get you a temp ban for trolling, depending on how a moderator sees the context. So I like to make such clear using someone as an example every now and then, and to also foster an appropriate level of insecurity and awaken any dormant schizophrenic tendencies. :evilg::D:pfft:

Also, while I want to watch this to keep from getting to extended in tangents from the OP, I think in another thread sometime I will say more about what the world might well be like if your apparent desires for "how the world should be", regarding the place of religion, were to come to pass too quickly (or even at all).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnyderShrugged

Not really, the majority of the charitable works I have seen globally by people of faith asks for little in return beyond maybe an open ear to hear their message. I just saw literally thousands of young school children get a new pair of shoes and even some nail clipping and hygiene for their feet from unpayed volunteers who asked for nothing in return except an occasional hug from the kids.

I saw this with my own eyes. It was beautiful.

---

And this is what I hate about organizations that do "crusades." I live in Billy Graham territory and how about just donating your time for nothing? Why do I have to hear "your message?" To me, there are too many "buts" involved in that type of charity. As a person who grew up Catholic, we never went door to door or country to country, "spreading the gospel or word," and I've never understood that from other religions. It's like you're forcing your religion on people.

I've talked to random people in the past, thinking, "hey, I might have a new friend here." But invariably, it turns out they want me to either hear their gospel, take their pamphlet or go to their church. My neighbor down the street invited me to a "guys" get together in his driveway. He said they have a fire pit, drink some drinks (didn't say whether it was alcohol or not,but I brought water) and just shoot the ****. Turns out they are all religious people who go on crusades and do tons of preaching. I was cordial, but I've not been back. Thought I had some good male neighbor friends to talk with, but all they wanted to talk about was their church activities. Bleh.

I have long envied the Mormon church's sense of community. One of my best friends in college was sexually assaulted at knife point. While I and a bunch of her friends were there for her every minute we could be in the aftermath, I noted her church had somebody with her every moment of the day she wanted company, and I mean every moment. Their support through the entire ordeal was amazing. When she moved to another city, they found her a home where she could stay with other Mormons till she could get her bearings and rent her own place. I went up to visit her, and they accepted me socially and at church without trying to convert me.

If I could chose to believe for the sake of belonging to a community, I would chose to be Mormon. Alas, I don't believe, and I've read too much history. I can only say their sense of community is awe inspiring.

As a country we are missing this sense of community, and it goes far beyond churches and religion. We are becoming less social. We belong to fewer organizations whether it be the YMCA or the Alderman's Guild. Our sense of being a part of anything local is strained. How many people can even name half the people who live on their street or hall? The decline of the religious community is really a symptom of a bigger problem/change.

Out of the 70% of young adults that still profess a religious affiliation I suspect that at least some of them either lied on the survey or are in denial. I don't think it's a large number but in some areas like the South, admitting that you have no religious affiliation carries a heavy stigma which will cause some to lie.

I'm a young adult in one of the most Christian and conservative states in the entire country, Oklahoma but out of the dozen or so people that I hang out with only one of them still believes in God. It's not like I seek these people out either. It's just the norm for my age group. My generation doesn't seem to care about religion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DjTj

I agree that churches need to stop fighting science and embrace it. But I think this really comes from the perversion of politics. The source of opposition to evolution is as much centered in political belief as it is religious belief. This manifests itself much worse in prosperity gospel or other blatant attempts to bend religion to the will of political expedience.

---

That's the problem with religion, isn't it? Once you build that highway of credulity, people can take advantage of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DjTj

But for this kid, it helped him with his substance abuse, didn't it? Sure, it came with some baggage, but he certainly believes it was worth it, doesn't he?

---

Help is better than no help, and help without the indoctrination is better than help with indoctrination...

His life could have taken several different tracks. Some tracks would be clearly worse than getting indoctrinated. Some tracks would be clearly better. While there are clear short term benefits to the church helping him, as far as I can tell his long term capability to flourish has been severely diminished.



So this gets us into a question about human flourishing. Generally, I would base my principles about human flourising on what is real. I value happiness, feeling of fulfillment, lack of suffering, etc, but the "reality" of these things seems to be an important factor. Otherwise it could be said that human flourishing can be produced by a virtual reality device that electrically stimulates proper regions of our brains.

Things get complicated if you offer a choice between reality-based suffering and fairlytale-based happiness. I say we should go with the reality unless there is a really really really good reason to do otherwise (assuming such a reason is even possible).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DjTj

One thing I have been thinking about, and is mentioned in the Post article, is that when you replace churches with government as social support, it takes the community out of it. People don't meet on a weekly basis to get updates on how the local homeless shelter is doing when it is run by the government, but they do if it is run by the church. Separating social support from religion has also unfortunately separated social support from the community. If the church is diminished as a civic institution, what is replacing it?

---

I think that is a great question, and it is still open. I do not think that government can provide same services according to the traditional model. I see government's role here is that of a facilitor. Communities could form around local libraries, educational institutions, etc. I do agree that there would be a void in communities if churches were to disappear tomorrow. I understand that various secular/atheist organizations are working on forming local communities, but their work is far from done.

I also ran into this interesting lecture about replacing religions:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5tGpMcFF7U

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DjTj

It seems like social services have become more like consumer services provided by a distant government, rather than something the community is coming together to provide. And this seems like a problem to me because people start to see government from a more consumer perspective (What do I get from the government?) rather than a civic institution (What can I contribute to the community?).

Here's a link to the Post article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...478_story.html

---

I think that problems with humans and human institutions will remain, and that they should be examined and addressed. I think this process will go much smoother as we do not hold any institution above evaluation and criticism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alexey

I do not think it is fair to accuse me of blindness due to preconceived notions when I am openly acknowledging the acts you are talking about.

i am merely pointing out that in each of these acts there are two components - the real help and the bull**** supernatural fluffing. This supernatural stuff corrupts the real help.

---

Your position is that feeding the hungry is negated by also preaching? So it's the same as leaving them to starve?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnyderShrugged

Like I said, you have devoted ample time to #2, why not spend the same learning about #1 now instead? You might just learn something about #2 that you didnt realize in the process.

---

I am very interested in learning about humans (psychology, history, neurobiology, anthropology, etc). There are so many new things to learn.

I do not see enough evidence to re-examine the way I see good works done by compassionate people. Religion can encourage them, but it is really far from being an ideal, or even a good way of doing that... and it comes with baggage..

---------- Post added October-10th-2012 at 02:01 PM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Destino

Your position is that feeding the hungry is negated by also preaching? So it's the same as leaving them to starve?

---

Are they hungry because they have too many kids because somebody preached against birth control?

Quote:

---

Orig. posted by Jumbo: Also, while I want to watch this to keep from getting too extended in tangents from the OP,

---

Everyone go ahead and take another turn or two with the "missionary position" :D to conclude your thoughts, and then refresh on, and return to, the more pertinent themes available in the OP as we have already approached the looping effect on this tangent. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alexey

Are they hungry because they have too many kids because somebody preached against birth control?

---

I don't know Alexey, does poverty exist entirely because of access to birth control? While you figure that out someone is out there handing out food and trying to help... at least until you figure out how to end poverty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jumbo

Everyone go ahead and take another turn or two with the "missionary position" :D to conclude your thoughts, and then refresh on, and return to, the more pertinent themes available in the OP as we have already approached the looping effect on this tangent. :)

---

I will trry to get myself back on the OP tract!

I am not surprised, nor even concerned at the stats in the OP. In my experience, young folks often stray or never are even introduced to a religious faith, as well as it's not often seen as "cool" to be religious.

I've often seen that many people that I now know as people of faith, that they come to that faith later in life after some form of enlightening personal experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jumbo

...
Hugely life-saving and life-improving things like clean water and medical aid and some schooling (etc etc) seems to me to offset any proposed negatives of proselytizing.
...

---

I think we are underestimating the role traditional/religious thinking is playing in this discussion in particular and humanity's vision of the big picture in general.

We are a bunch of apes in pants, made out of star dust, trying to make it on a tiny rock that is hurling through space. We are here without a creator, without a plan, and without a purpose... yet here we are with our thoughts and feelings, our happiness and our suffering, our successes and our failures. Now we have to figure out what to do about all this. Pardon me for not giving much credit to the proposition that we should deal with this situation by denying that it is real.

(ok will try to be nicer and stay on the OP)

---------- Post added October-10th-2012 at 02:16 PM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Destino

I don't know Alexey, does poverty exist entirely because of access to birth control? While you figure that out someone is out there handing out food and trying to help... at least until you figure out how to end poverty.

---

Actually yes, birth control and empowerment of women is the tried and true solution to poverty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnyderShrugged

I will trry to get myself back on the OP tract!

I am not surprised, nor even concerned at the stats in the OP. In my experience, young folks often stray or never are even introduced to a religious faith, as well as it's not often seen as "cool" to be religious.

I've often seen that many people that I now know as people of faith, that they come to that faith later in life after some form of enlightening personal experience.

---

Thanks for the help, thread-wise, SS. Since the OP, another popular phrase (they have a million) in Alcoholics Anonymous (and NA of course) stated in varying ways keeps coming to mind: "I'm more of a spiritual person than a religious person."

When I find time (right) to match level of interest, I hope to remember to go review what role age (or other) demographics play in any reported trends towards some denominations/categories in this country increasing in size, and yet identification of being more non-denominational is also increasing.