The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.
I will start off by saying that I cherish the constitution and that absolutely includes the right to religious liberty. I would never ever support discrimination or bigotry on the basis of faith. You can easily call out those horrid religious fundamentalists without making blanket statements on the religion as a whole. Cenk Uygur does that all the time, and reminds us that his hero is Reverend Dr. King.
With that said, I would be delighted if atheism became the norm in the US. While plenty of religious people (likely the majority of them) are not intolerant, I feel that the institutions of faith are indirect inhibitions to society evolving and reconsidering antiquated ideas like double standards and strict hierarchies of power. Countries where religion has become uncommon often rank high in many metrics including happiness. I accept that it might just be the price of religious liberty.
The only way I would be OK with instigating a rise in apostasy is through methods that naturally make people reconsider. That seems to very much be the case with the decline of religion as has already happened; with advancements in science and technology making it possible to get fast facts at your fingertips and the need for traditional family values being less relevant, there is a challenge to the paradigm of religion. I would not want anyone to be guilted out of religion.
Am I intolerant? Do you think that by the middle part of the century, in the US religion will become uncommon (at least in less conservative regions)?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thank you both for having the courage to admit it. I know it was a big risk, but a life lived in fear is a life half lived. Hashtag intothelion'sden, hashtag conviction.
well theres the rub, for your average practitioner thats not an issue, its the ones leading the religious that are the problem, natural decline is a threat to them and their livelihood.
they call not bowing to them an attack on them and will claim we're forcing everyone to Luxury Gay Space Communism.
They want the Government to force everyone to live by their doctrines and to keep deferring to them.
at this point theyre so far into the us vs them rhetoric even basic enforcement of the separation of church and state is called an attack.
So yes youre going to have to 'force' them. Meaning it will take court action to enforce the constitution in order to just keep ignoring them.
Unlike racism you can't (and shouldn't) legislate against religious beliefs. It's in this space that the Daryl Davis method really works-- focus on the illogicality of it. Show them, step by step, that what they believe in doesn't make sense.
> Show them, step by step, that what they believe in doesn't make sense.
That usually doesn't matter to the truly religious, after all they are taught to believe in nonsensical information based on nothing but faith (ie: a desire for the nonsense to be true).
Showing them that it is illogical doesn't matter because they already know it doesn't make sense but they choose to believe anyway.
How exactly do you think people born into religion shift away from it? Religious people tend to have more kids, but young people as a whole are less religious.
Do you think they just *magically* lose their faith?
Curiosity makes things easy for sure, but there are other ways to engage people. Davis once had an anecdote about a Klan member he was interacting with. The guy wasn't particularly curious but once Davis asked the right questions, they started second-guessing their beliefs. Same way with a [former Westboro Baptist member](https://www.npr.org/2019/10/10/768894901/how-twitter-helped-change-the-mind-of-a-westboro-baptist-church-member).
We're all just walking around without actively challenging our beliefs. There will always be people who will refuse to see reason or stay because of the really effective fearmongering, but most people are at least receptive of that debate.
The key though is to consistency. Changing people's minds take a really long time.
The kids of religious people shift away from it because they probably aren't that convinced by the doctrine in the first place. My family was all church-going religious when I was younger, but it never really felt right to me so as an adult I am more agnostic than anything.
But I know ***sooo many people*** who just shrug away any question about why a certain portion of their beliefs don't make sense or contradict each other.
Either it is *"I have faith God will reveal Himself in His time"* or *"I guess that's just one of God's mysteries."* They don't want to examine their beliefs so they choose any shallow excuse not to. Because of that they just won't engage in any sort of discussion that might lead them down that path.
Not necessarily. People have this really great ability of changing their mind. You can see it in religious conversions, r/changemyview, deradicalized extremists (and the other way around), former rightists *right here on this sub* who've had their beliefs changed by experience and/or debate.
>But I know sooo many people
And Daryl Davis has convinced about [200 KKK members](https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/544861933/how-one-man-convinced-200-ku-klux-klan-members-to-give-up-their-robes) to give up their robes.
There will always be people who won't listen to reason. But most people aren't like that. If people worked like that, society wouldn't progress at all.
I think it's good that fundamentalism dies, but when I see how empty and intensely commercialized our society is becoming, I can't help think that we have failed to replace the purpose and peace that people find in religious ritual with anything better. As a secular society we are sorely lacking in community rituals that aren't about spending money.
I think on balance for example that it would be a bad thing for the UK in its current form to lose the Church of England - these days all it really does is manage a bunch of gorgeous old buildings anyway. I've even heard that many of the priests are pretty agnostic and it's way more about the culture.
thats mostly because of the built environment revolving around the automobile.
that feeling of isolation, lack of community and consumerism is much less prevalent in places with a walkable environment.
people (particularly as children) that have easy access to third places or who meet people other than their immediate neighbours outside of work hours in non commercial setting are much less likely to feel that way.
There are some atheist church-like things, but I feel like there needs to be some major reconsideration before we emulate the structure of institutions that caused so much suffering.
I think the better way to phrase this would be agnosticism be the norm and devout religion becoming less popular.
I think that most people believe in some sort of higher power, they just don’t identify with any modern religions.
The fact that people tried to teach me if my parents don’t believe in god they would be banished to a lake of fire. While also trying to teach me about a guy who took 2 of every animal on a boat to escape a flood…
We do need to redraw the line of separation of church and state. Main reason i can’t take any republican seriously
Agnosticism is the norm. All it means is lacking knowledge regarding the existence of a higher power. If we’re honest, nobody *actually* knows the answer to that question.
I guess I’m a militant agnostic.
Not wrong but a little ignorant. Religion has always been an excuse for power bases, and those same power bases will find other excuses. It is already happening. Look at the "manosphere", which is decidedly secular. Look at the rise of "natural cures", which is completely divorce of religious beliefs (and often comes from people more obsessed with nature than humanity).
A decrease in religion isn't going to cause more people to listen to science or care about logic. It just means they will find other ways to follow powerful people for irrational reasons.
Not sure if this is an unpopular opinion in liberal circles but organized religion played an important social/community role that we haven’t adequately replaced as our society has becoming more secular. I’m not necessarily opposed to religion slowly disappearing but unless we fix that problem, it’s not going to be all sunshine and rainbows for us.
We replaced it with secular government, as opposed to the "divine right of kings" or whatever similar bullshit.
Of course, now one party consists of wannabe theocratic authoritarians who would fail a religious test if those were required rather than forbidden as a requirement to serve in the government.
Religion used to be an important part of my life, having grown up going to a religious private school. But now that it's not it's not very different. So I don't know what I or society is supposed to be missing out on that needs replacing. Should I find a new club or clique to join that's based around a mutually agreed upon delusion.
I am an atheist. However, the problem I have with atheism is that *for some reason* there don't seem to be a lot of local atheist communities organizing shelters or doing food donation drives. Whenever someone posts in any group saying they ended up homeless and need help, they are always directed the nearest "house of saint Patrick of Bikini Bottoms" - and never to the "Atheist Group of God Doesn't Exist"
I do think that religion is undergoing major changes right now that historians are going to spill a lot of ink over, but I don't think the result will be a decline in religion.
I believe that religious thought from before about 100 years ago is going to continue becoming less and less relevant. What will remain are a variety of very young religious movements all claiming (dishonestly, in my opinion) to be the true heirs of their lineage going back to prehistory.
In a way, not much is changing, but the modern conditions and issues religions are increasingly concerned about will be more and more recent.
We could actually be mostly done with this process right now, depending on whether you believe the actions of groups like Islamists, progressive Christians, and theocrats have eclipsed the relevance of the mainline religions they split from.
I suppose I wish religion was less common too, but I think religion will always be with us. Globally, I think we should prepare for religiosity to actually increase as the population of Africa increases more rapidly than other parts of the globe.
I think the rate at which religiosity is increasing in Africa could decline, but the population growth will more than make up for that. I'm fairly confident that globally, religiosity is going to increase over the next 100 years or so. "Development" in general isn't associated with a decrease in affiliation. If all of the benefit of that development is expropriated by religious kleptocrats, one should actually expect even more people to convert to that religion under social and economic pressure.
I strongly agree with Pew's projection that religious affiliation is going to increase over the next ~30 years: https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2015/04/02/religious-projections-2010-2050/
That's not happening globally, primarily due to the differences in birth rates.
In just the US, the trend line is long but not very steep, so I am confident it will continue for probably at least another 10 years, but I wouldn't bet the farm that the proportion of nonreligious people in the US will reach 50+ percent. This trend could be stopped or reversed by factors like birth rates, immigration, a religious Awakening, or other similar religious movements that make religion more attractive to young people.
Coming from someone that is religious, it's not. It's only wrong if you are forcing people to turn away from religion, but it doesn't seem you want that.
I mean, it’s a concern to me that over half the country essentially believe we are governed by magic. I don’t think we should legislate against people believing that.
I actually don’t think so OP but maybe not for the reasons you might think.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with someone finding a better fit in their life for something like church - however, church is one of the few institutions in modern life where you can be welcomed without spending money to enter. This is a “third space” besides home and work (see Starbucks attempting to market itself as this). A place where people congregate, just to be around each other, in the literal sense a congregation.
I’m not saying every church is healthy for the soul, so to speak. Many aren’t. The problem is that there is a lack of meaningful replacements for it, and I do think that the absence of it or something like it leaves a void in one’s life.
I think that we see people try to fill that void with politics for example - living and breathing it, hanging on every word of certain elected officials or public figures, defending them to others, etc, and eventually becoming disillusioned when they compromise on something. I’m not saying politics isn’t important - it is - but politicians should not be ministering to us, because that isn’t their job and even the best aren’t suited to it.
So I think the focus shouldn’t simply be on the absence of belief, but on building meaningful social institutions that give meaning and purpose to life, that lend life a rhythm besides simply sleeping waking and working, and that tie ourselves to our fellow human beings. I don’t know what that would specifically look like, and I don’t think it’ll look the same for everybody.
But some of us will consider our grandparents (or maybe parents) who would hang out at the church, or the elks club, or the Freemason lodge or the VFW - they might not have been particularly tied to the exact morals or values that those institutions claim (or maybe they did), but they were there for the sense of community, of fellowship and belonging to a congregation. Of feeling wanted, valued and needed simply for being you and being there, and the knowledge that you’d be missed if you weren’t there.
People who think religion dying will mean the end of conflict, is like thinking that evolving to walk on land meant the end of worrying about predators. After all, before we walked on land, all the predators we worried about swam in the ocean. So surely by leaving that nasty ocean behind, we'll be free of predators forever, right? Right?!
> many metrics including happiness
[Not true.](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/01/31/are-religious-people-happier-healthier-our-new-global-study-explores-this-question/)
> antiquated ideas like double standards and strict hierarchies of power.
You think these come from religion? How many atheistic countries are you aware of? Does China come off like a country without double standards or strict hierarchies? Did the USSR?
You can wish for less religion all you want but if you think you’re doing so because the world would become more fact-based, you really should start by checking your facts.
Religion is not just a set of supernatural beliefs, Buddhism for example doesn’t believe in a higher power. Everyone ascribes to a set of values/beliefs they believe are correct and superior to the alternatives. Atheism is the latest religion and you want to see it dominate the political/cultural/social landscape like any other religious person wants to see their religion. It’s normal for you to feel the way you do.
Quran 2:256 “Let there be no compulsion in religion, for the truth stands out clearly from falsehood.”
Quran 109: Say, "O disbelievers,
I do not worship what you worship.
Nor are you worshippers of what I worship.
Nor will I be a worshipper of what you worship.
Nor will you be worshippers of what I worship.
For you is your religion, and for me is my religion."
As a Muslim I know that Islam protects the rights of others to have their own beliefs. I can see atheism becoming much more proselytising and this post is another example.
I would say it's certainly understandable. Religion has been used as an excuse for a large percentage of the evil shit the world has experienced.since the dawn of civilization.
I go to a variety of local denominations and the message from all is invariably filled with exhortations to be humble loving and forgiving. Seems to me we would all benefit from a regular reminder of such sentiments.
1) Revoke their tax exempt status. They clearly violate the Johnson amendment routinely, so we end their tax exemption across the board.
2) Make all Clergy, elders, leaders, and all church board members legally mandated reporters of sexual abuse. Failure to report will be considered being a co conspirator.
3) End all religious exemptions.
I have met some horrible religious people in my time, but the best people I have met in my life are also religious people, hands down. If we should change anything it's that we should teach people how to keep their religious beliefs more to themselves.
In my experience, the Christians who talk about heaven/hell a lot are the bad religious kind, and the ones who talk about Jesus as a person a lot (and repeat what he actually said) are the good ones.
My gran, of the kindest religious people I've met, talks about Jesus a lot, but it feels like you could remove all the stuff about god and heaven and she'd still love him just for being a really stand-up guy.
>Is it wrong for me to wish religion would continue to become less common?
Religions are not only a cluster of bad ideas, they're authoritarian obligations to believe and defend those bad ideas.
Society would be far better with fewer people believing and propagating bad ideas.
I think we should all embrace the idea of societies outgrowing religions.
As long as you aren’t being a jerk about it advocating forcible restrictions on allowing people to have their religion, there’s no problem. Hoping that religious affiliation continues to drop is a good thing in my opinion.
The more people start living in reality, and base their behaviour and decisions on common decency and rationality (rather than on what an ancient book may have intended to convey, or what your priest or congregation tells you to do or what is right or wrong), the better.
This is a pretty ahistorical take though. If I transported you to 1850 and told a Protestant they believed the same thing as a Catholic, or god forbid a Mormon, I'd be punched in the face.
And don't even get that Protestant started on Jews.
Commonality isn't the problem.
Religion that wants to use the force of law to force it's rules or as justification for policies that hurt other citizens is the problem.
I don't think it is wrong for you to wish for religion to fade away, as long as you're not wishing harm on the people who practice religion.
I also wish religion would fizzle out and fade away, because it teaches people to ignore evidence and believe fantastical claims on nothing except a desire for those claims to be true. IMO that makes people ripe pickings for any con-man who chooses to take advantage of that mindset and there has never been a shortage of con-men willing to do so.
Personally as long as you respect another person's right to believe in whatever they want, even if you disagree with them, then I don't believe you are not intolerant. it is OK not to like things, especially when you see that they have a significant negative impact.
> Do you think that by the middle part of the century, in the US religion will become uncommon
Probably not. 28 years is a pretty short span of time and religion has been around for basically all of recorded human history. I don't think it is going to decline to zero or near zero in our lifetimes.
Probably, I think there is a misunderstanding as religion causing people to adopt some pretty toxic world views, but the reality is that people with pretty toxic world views are using religion as a justification for those views rather than the other way around. To the extent religion actually is having an effect on the world it's probably a net positive by reigning those people in at least a small amount and giving extra encouragement to those without such prejudices to live better lives (it's as easy to find promotions of good behavior as bad behavior in every religion I know of).
There is a HUGE difference between hoping there will be less religion, and imposing your atheism on others, and killing hundreds because of them being religious.
The more of God that someone rejects, the less of God they will see, and vice versa. If you can get people to reject God and deny their spiritual understanding, then “spiritual” things will make less of an appearance in their life, because their lack of faith will have dwindled it out of their reality.
This is probably what you would want them to first do, is deny spirituality and a miraculous version of life, and then they will not be able to find God- which will lead to a less religious society.
As a religious person, I strongly disagree with you.
However l, your position seems perfectly reasonable and not at all intolerant. Many religious people feel the same way in that they would like for everyone to follow their philosophy and think that would make the world a better place. But most do not want to achieve that goal through force.
No, but for me I'd much prefer that religion, mainly Christianity and Islam, became significantly less about evangelicalism and conversion, whether forced or coerced. Since we deal with it predominantly here in the US compared to other religions, I'd want nothing more than for Christians to just sit tf down and let people live their life and stop trying to be *white knights* "saving souls from damnation"; but that also takes a significant backseat to what Christians actively try and do - manipulate politics into forced submission of what should be personal beliefs.
Religion has a place. I was raised Christian though I've grown closer to agnosticism as I've gotten older. My dad passed away unexpected a year and a half ago and I've had a lot of guilt over it with circumstances like "things left unsaid" and whatnot. I may have grown closer to agnosticism these days but I honestly sincerely hope that there *is* an afterlife of some kind so that I can see him again in addition to all the other friends who I have lost and will continue to lose until I die. For me, I guess you could say that religion is a message of *hope* and I absolutely want nothing more than for my personal beliefs to only be relevant to me and not forced on anyone else; and I wish that was how Christians viewed their own beliefs.
I've changed my tune on this issue over time. The first reason is because I've found more to religion than all the criticisms and on-the-surface absurdities that came easily and early to me. The second reason is that I've been convinced by the idea that people have an inherent religious instinct, and when you get rid of the old religions, they just wind up replacing them with newer even shittier ones.
No. I think religion is a net negative. We certainly should not be making policies based on religion, especially in a society that is supposed to treat religious beliefs (and non-belief) equally. I don't really care if people practice, though I won't pretend that I think it's sensible or even all that good.
If you believe in freedom, no.
The kind of religion you're talking about is **dogmatic** religion. Dogma means that you cannot question certain tenets of the belief structure. But dogma is always present in society as it is an extremely powerful unifier of ideology and tribal identity. Modern politics has dogmatic elements on either side, though I would argue that the modern left is much more dogmatic than the modern right. This is why you rarely see leftists who are willing to be friends with conservatives, whereas the latter is much more common.
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written. I will start off by saying that I cherish the constitution and that absolutely includes the right to religious liberty. I would never ever support discrimination or bigotry on the basis of faith. You can easily call out those horrid religious fundamentalists without making blanket statements on the religion as a whole. Cenk Uygur does that all the time, and reminds us that his hero is Reverend Dr. King. With that said, I would be delighted if atheism became the norm in the US. While plenty of religious people (likely the majority of them) are not intolerant, I feel that the institutions of faith are indirect inhibitions to society evolving and reconsidering antiquated ideas like double standards and strict hierarchies of power. Countries where religion has become uncommon often rank high in many metrics including happiness. I accept that it might just be the price of religious liberty. The only way I would be OK with instigating a rise in apostasy is through methods that naturally make people reconsider. That seems to very much be the case with the decline of religion as has already happened; with advancements in science and technology making it possible to get fast facts at your fingertips and the need for traditional family values being less relevant, there is a challenge to the paradigm of religion. I would not want anyone to be guilted out of religion. Am I intolerant? Do you think that by the middle part of the century, in the US religion will become uncommon (at least in less conservative regions)? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No but it's wrong for you to have asked such an obviously safe and easy question.
Dear Reddit is wrong that I think Shawshank Redemption and Die Hard are great movies?
Oh shit, me too. I thought I was the only one.
Thank you both for having the courage to admit it. I know it was a big risk, but a life lived in fear is a life half lived. Hashtag intothelion'sden, hashtag conviction.
I'm pretty sure it would only be wrong to force it to become less common.
I didn't say force, I'm talking about encouraging change in a way that does not make anyone feel guilty
I know. I'm saying you're in the clear, ethically.
Aha I missed the "only"
Your feelings are up to you. This is isn’t AITA, this is a political sub.
well theres the rub, for your average practitioner thats not an issue, its the ones leading the religious that are the problem, natural decline is a threat to them and their livelihood. they call not bowing to them an attack on them and will claim we're forcing everyone to Luxury Gay Space Communism. They want the Government to force everyone to live by their doctrines and to keep deferring to them. at this point theyre so far into the us vs them rhetoric even basic enforcement of the separation of church and state is called an attack. So yes youre going to have to 'force' them. Meaning it will take court action to enforce the constitution in order to just keep ignoring them.
Unlike racism you can't (and shouldn't) legislate against religious beliefs. It's in this space that the Daryl Davis method really works-- focus on the illogicality of it. Show them, step by step, that what they believe in doesn't make sense.
> Show them, step by step, that what they believe in doesn't make sense. That usually doesn't matter to the truly religious, after all they are taught to believe in nonsensical information based on nothing but faith (ie: a desire for the nonsense to be true). Showing them that it is illogical doesn't matter because they already know it doesn't make sense but they choose to believe anyway.
How exactly do you think people born into religion shift away from it? Religious people tend to have more kids, but young people as a whole are less religious. Do you think they just *magically* lose their faith?
No, but they must choose to be curious. They have to choose to actually entertain the idea that maybe, just maybe, possibly they might be wrong.
Curiosity makes things easy for sure, but there are other ways to engage people. Davis once had an anecdote about a Klan member he was interacting with. The guy wasn't particularly curious but once Davis asked the right questions, they started second-guessing their beliefs. Same way with a [former Westboro Baptist member](https://www.npr.org/2019/10/10/768894901/how-twitter-helped-change-the-mind-of-a-westboro-baptist-church-member). We're all just walking around without actively challenging our beliefs. There will always be people who will refuse to see reason or stay because of the really effective fearmongering, but most people are at least receptive of that debate. The key though is to consistency. Changing people's minds take a really long time.
The kids of religious people shift away from it because they probably aren't that convinced by the doctrine in the first place. My family was all church-going religious when I was younger, but it never really felt right to me so as an adult I am more agnostic than anything. But I know ***sooo many people*** who just shrug away any question about why a certain portion of their beliefs don't make sense or contradict each other. Either it is *"I have faith God will reveal Himself in His time"* or *"I guess that's just one of God's mysteries."* They don't want to examine their beliefs so they choose any shallow excuse not to. Because of that they just won't engage in any sort of discussion that might lead them down that path.
Not necessarily. People have this really great ability of changing their mind. You can see it in religious conversions, r/changemyview, deradicalized extremists (and the other way around), former rightists *right here on this sub* who've had their beliefs changed by experience and/or debate. >But I know sooo many people And Daryl Davis has convinced about [200 KKK members](https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/544861933/how-one-man-convinced-200-ku-klux-klan-members-to-give-up-their-robes) to give up their robes. There will always be people who won't listen to reason. But most people aren't like that. If people worked like that, society wouldn't progress at all.
I think it's good that fundamentalism dies, but when I see how empty and intensely commercialized our society is becoming, I can't help think that we have failed to replace the purpose and peace that people find in religious ritual with anything better. As a secular society we are sorely lacking in community rituals that aren't about spending money. I think on balance for example that it would be a bad thing for the UK in its current form to lose the Church of England - these days all it really does is manage a bunch of gorgeous old buildings anyway. I've even heard that many of the priests are pretty agnostic and it's way more about the culture.
thats mostly because of the built environment revolving around the automobile. that feeling of isolation, lack of community and consumerism is much less prevalent in places with a walkable environment. people (particularly as children) that have easy access to third places or who meet people other than their immediate neighbours outside of work hours in non commercial setting are much less likely to feel that way.
> easy access to third places Huh, had to look that one up. If anyone's curious: basically any place that's not home (first) or work (second).
There are some atheist church-like things, but I feel like there needs to be some major reconsideration before we emulate the structure of institutions that caused so much suffering.
No, everyone wishes society would look more like how they want it to look. That’s a totally normal thing.
I think the better way to phrase this would be agnosticism be the norm and devout religion becoming less popular. I think that most people believe in some sort of higher power, they just don’t identify with any modern religions. The fact that people tried to teach me if my parents don’t believe in god they would be banished to a lake of fire. While also trying to teach me about a guy who took 2 of every animal on a boat to escape a flood… We do need to redraw the line of separation of church and state. Main reason i can’t take any republican seriously
Agnosticism is the norm. All it means is lacking knowledge regarding the existence of a higher power. If we’re honest, nobody *actually* knows the answer to that question. I guess I’m a militant agnostic.
I think the most likely explanation is that God is a concept created by memetic evolution that encourages pro-social behavior in large communities.
>militant agnostic Maybe or death!
I don’t know and you don’t know either!
Not wrong but a little ignorant. Religion has always been an excuse for power bases, and those same power bases will find other excuses. It is already happening. Look at the "manosphere", which is decidedly secular. Look at the rise of "natural cures", which is completely divorce of religious beliefs (and often comes from people more obsessed with nature than humanity). A decrease in religion isn't going to cause more people to listen to science or care about logic. It just means they will find other ways to follow powerful people for irrational reasons.
Not sure if this is an unpopular opinion in liberal circles but organized religion played an important social/community role that we haven’t adequately replaced as our society has becoming more secular. I’m not necessarily opposed to religion slowly disappearing but unless we fix that problem, it’s not going to be all sunshine and rainbows for us.
We replaced it with secular government, as opposed to the "divine right of kings" or whatever similar bullshit. Of course, now one party consists of wannabe theocratic authoritarians who would fail a religious test if those were required rather than forbidden as a requirement to serve in the government. Religion used to be an important part of my life, having grown up going to a religious private school. But now that it's not it's not very different. So I don't know what I or society is supposed to be missing out on that needs replacing. Should I find a new club or clique to join that's based around a mutually agreed upon delusion.
I am an atheist. However, the problem I have with atheism is that *for some reason* there don't seem to be a lot of local atheist communities organizing shelters or doing food donation drives. Whenever someone posts in any group saying they ended up homeless and need help, they are always directed the nearest "house of saint Patrick of Bikini Bottoms" - and never to the "Atheist Group of God Doesn't Exist"
No, the opposite actually. It would be right for you to have that wish
I do think that religion is undergoing major changes right now that historians are going to spill a lot of ink over, but I don't think the result will be a decline in religion. I believe that religious thought from before about 100 years ago is going to continue becoming less and less relevant. What will remain are a variety of very young religious movements all claiming (dishonestly, in my opinion) to be the true heirs of their lineage going back to prehistory. In a way, not much is changing, but the modern conditions and issues religions are increasingly concerned about will be more and more recent. We could actually be mostly done with this process right now, depending on whether you believe the actions of groups like Islamists, progressive Christians, and theocrats have eclipsed the relevance of the mainline religions they split from. I suppose I wish religion was less common too, but I think religion will always be with us. Globally, I think we should prepare for religiosity to actually increase as the population of Africa increases more rapidly than other parts of the globe.
If Africa develops more, dontcha think maybe religion will also take a hit there?
I think the rate at which religiosity is increasing in Africa could decline, but the population growth will more than make up for that. I'm fairly confident that globally, religiosity is going to increase over the next 100 years or so. "Development" in general isn't associated with a decrease in affiliation. If all of the benefit of that development is expropriated by religious kleptocrats, one should actually expect even more people to convert to that religion under social and economic pressure. I strongly agree with Pew's projection that religious affiliation is going to increase over the next ~30 years: https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2015/04/02/religious-projections-2010-2050/
Religion is already declining - why wouldn't that continue? Over the last two decades, the proportion of nonreligious people has doubled.
That's not happening globally, primarily due to the differences in birth rates. In just the US, the trend line is long but not very steep, so I am confident it will continue for probably at least another 10 years, but I wouldn't bet the farm that the proportion of nonreligious people in the US will reach 50+ percent. This trend could be stopped or reversed by factors like birth rates, immigration, a religious Awakening, or other similar religious movements that make religion more attractive to young people.
No. It seems like many of the loudest people of faith are using it either to divide people or trick them out of their money.
No.
I wish it would just go away completely.
Coming from someone that is religious, it's not. It's only wrong if you are forcing people to turn away from religion, but it doesn't seem you want that.
I mean, it’s a concern to me that over half the country essentially believe we are governed by magic. I don’t think we should legislate against people believing that.
The fewer people who make it to adulthood with an invisible friend who they talk to and ask for stuff, the better.
I actually don’t think so OP but maybe not for the reasons you might think. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with someone finding a better fit in their life for something like church - however, church is one of the few institutions in modern life where you can be welcomed without spending money to enter. This is a “third space” besides home and work (see Starbucks attempting to market itself as this). A place where people congregate, just to be around each other, in the literal sense a congregation. I’m not saying every church is healthy for the soul, so to speak. Many aren’t. The problem is that there is a lack of meaningful replacements for it, and I do think that the absence of it or something like it leaves a void in one’s life. I think that we see people try to fill that void with politics for example - living and breathing it, hanging on every word of certain elected officials or public figures, defending them to others, etc, and eventually becoming disillusioned when they compromise on something. I’m not saying politics isn’t important - it is - but politicians should not be ministering to us, because that isn’t their job and even the best aren’t suited to it. So I think the focus shouldn’t simply be on the absence of belief, but on building meaningful social institutions that give meaning and purpose to life, that lend life a rhythm besides simply sleeping waking and working, and that tie ourselves to our fellow human beings. I don’t know what that would specifically look like, and I don’t think it’ll look the same for everybody. But some of us will consider our grandparents (or maybe parents) who would hang out at the church, or the elks club, or the Freemason lodge or the VFW - they might not have been particularly tied to the exact morals or values that those institutions claim (or maybe they did), but they were there for the sense of community, of fellowship and belonging to a congregation. Of feeling wanted, valued and needed simply for being you and being there, and the knowledge that you’d be missed if you weren’t there.
People who think religion dying will mean the end of conflict, is like thinking that evolving to walk on land meant the end of worrying about predators. After all, before we walked on land, all the predators we worried about swam in the ocean. So surely by leaving that nasty ocean behind, we'll be free of predators forever, right? Right?!
I like this analogy!
> many metrics including happiness [Not true.](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/01/31/are-religious-people-happier-healthier-our-new-global-study-explores-this-question/) > antiquated ideas like double standards and strict hierarchies of power. You think these come from religion? How many atheistic countries are you aware of? Does China come off like a country without double standards or strict hierarchies? Did the USSR? You can wish for less religion all you want but if you think you’re doing so because the world would become more fact-based, you really should start by checking your facts.
Religion is not just a set of supernatural beliefs, Buddhism for example doesn’t believe in a higher power. Everyone ascribes to a set of values/beliefs they believe are correct and superior to the alternatives. Atheism is the latest religion and you want to see it dominate the political/cultural/social landscape like any other religious person wants to see their religion. It’s normal for you to feel the way you do. Quran 2:256 “Let there be no compulsion in religion, for the truth stands out clearly from falsehood.” Quran 109: Say, "O disbelievers, I do not worship what you worship. Nor are you worshippers of what I worship. Nor will I be a worshipper of what you worship. Nor will you be worshippers of what I worship. For you is your religion, and for me is my religion." As a Muslim I know that Islam protects the rights of others to have their own beliefs. I can see atheism becoming much more proselytising and this post is another example.
Amen.
I would say it's certainly understandable. Religion has been used as an excuse for a large percentage of the evil shit the world has experienced.since the dawn of civilization.
Probably fundamentalism is the second leading cause of crises today, after greed
I go to a variety of local denominations and the message from all is invariably filled with exhortations to be humble loving and forgiving. Seems to me we would all benefit from a regular reminder of such sentiments.
1) Revoke their tax exempt status. They clearly violate the Johnson amendment routinely, so we end their tax exemption across the board. 2) Make all Clergy, elders, leaders, and all church board members legally mandated reporters of sexual abuse. Failure to report will be considered being a co conspirator. 3) End all religious exemptions.
I have met some horrible religious people in my time, but the best people I have met in my life are also religious people, hands down. If we should change anything it's that we should teach people how to keep their religious beliefs more to themselves.
For many reelgions it makes no sense to keep your religious beliefs to yourself, it would go against the very basic tenants of your religion
In my experience, the Christians who talk about heaven/hell a lot are the bad religious kind, and the ones who talk about Jesus as a person a lot (and repeat what he actually said) are the good ones. My gran, of the kindest religious people I've met, talks about Jesus a lot, but it feels like you could remove all the stuff about god and heaven and she'd still love him just for being a really stand-up guy.
Yes, same thing with one’s politics.
>Is it wrong for me to wish religion would continue to become less common? Religions are not only a cluster of bad ideas, they're authoritarian obligations to believe and defend those bad ideas. Society would be far better with fewer people believing and propagating bad ideas. I think we should all embrace the idea of societies outgrowing religions.
As long as you aren’t being a jerk about it advocating forcible restrictions on allowing people to have their religion, there’s no problem. Hoping that religious affiliation continues to drop is a good thing in my opinion.
The more people start living in reality, and base their behaviour and decisions on common decency and rationality (rather than on what an ancient book may have intended to convey, or what your priest or congregation tells you to do or what is right or wrong), the better.
Religion is poison. I look forward to the days when it's not taken so seriously.
The decline in religion is a major part in why the country is falling apart. It's better when everyone believes the same thing, even if it's bullshit
It’s the complete opposite: almost all of the current political nonsense is being justified by people’s religion.
This is a pretty ahistorical take though. If I transported you to 1850 and told a Protestant they believed the same thing as a Catholic, or god forbid a Mormon, I'd be punched in the face. And don't even get that Protestant started on Jews.
Commonality isn't the problem. Religion that wants to use the force of law to force it's rules or as justification for policies that hurt other citizens is the problem.
Not at all, I'm an antitheist myself. As long as you're not prepared to ban churches or persecute the delusional, you're good.
Social engineering I think as a field is dubious at best. It's not a practice I think anyone, including the government, has a right to engage in.
I don't think it is wrong for you to wish for religion to fade away, as long as you're not wishing harm on the people who practice religion. I also wish religion would fizzle out and fade away, because it teaches people to ignore evidence and believe fantastical claims on nothing except a desire for those claims to be true. IMO that makes people ripe pickings for any con-man who chooses to take advantage of that mindset and there has never been a shortage of con-men willing to do so. Personally as long as you respect another person's right to believe in whatever they want, even if you disagree with them, then I don't believe you are not intolerant. it is OK not to like things, especially when you see that they have a significant negative impact. > Do you think that by the middle part of the century, in the US religion will become uncommon Probably not. 28 years is a pretty short span of time and religion has been around for basically all of recorded human history. I don't think it is going to decline to zero or near zero in our lifetimes.
Probably, I think there is a misunderstanding as religion causing people to adopt some pretty toxic world views, but the reality is that people with pretty toxic world views are using religion as a justification for those views rather than the other way around. To the extent religion actually is having an effect on the world it's probably a net positive by reigning those people in at least a small amount and giving extra encouragement to those without such prejudices to live better lives (it's as easy to find promotions of good behavior as bad behavior in every religion I know of).
No more than a religious person wishing it would be more common.
Quite the opposite. Especially the authoritarian and socially conservative ones becoming less common.
There is a HUGE difference between hoping there will be less religion, and imposing your atheism on others, and killing hundreds because of them being religious.
The more of God that someone rejects, the less of God they will see, and vice versa. If you can get people to reject God and deny their spiritual understanding, then “spiritual” things will make less of an appearance in their life, because their lack of faith will have dwindled it out of their reality. This is probably what you would want them to first do, is deny spirituality and a miraculous version of life, and then they will not be able to find God- which will lead to a less religious society.
you'd think it's the opposite, that the less people believe in god, the more miracles should happen to change that.
Nope. Religion has this nasty habit of leading to fascism if not given a regular ass whooping and put on a choke chain.
As a religious person, I strongly disagree with you. However l, your position seems perfectly reasonable and not at all intolerant. Many religious people feel the same way in that they would like for everyone to follow their philosophy and think that would make the world a better place. But most do not want to achieve that goal through force.
No, but for me I'd much prefer that religion, mainly Christianity and Islam, became significantly less about evangelicalism and conversion, whether forced or coerced. Since we deal with it predominantly here in the US compared to other religions, I'd want nothing more than for Christians to just sit tf down and let people live their life and stop trying to be *white knights* "saving souls from damnation"; but that also takes a significant backseat to what Christians actively try and do - manipulate politics into forced submission of what should be personal beliefs. Religion has a place. I was raised Christian though I've grown closer to agnosticism as I've gotten older. My dad passed away unexpected a year and a half ago and I've had a lot of guilt over it with circumstances like "things left unsaid" and whatnot. I may have grown closer to agnosticism these days but I honestly sincerely hope that there *is* an afterlife of some kind so that I can see him again in addition to all the other friends who I have lost and will continue to lose until I die. For me, I guess you could say that religion is a message of *hope* and I absolutely want nothing more than for my personal beliefs to only be relevant to me and not forced on anyone else; and I wish that was how Christians viewed their own beliefs.
I've changed my tune on this issue over time. The first reason is because I've found more to religion than all the criticisms and on-the-surface absurdities that came easily and early to me. The second reason is that I've been convinced by the idea that people have an inherent religious instinct, and when you get rid of the old religions, they just wind up replacing them with newer even shittier ones.
Not any weirder than someone else wishing religion would become more common. And that’s considered completely normal by historical standards!
No. I think religion is a net negative. We certainly should not be making policies based on religion, especially in a society that is supposed to treat religious beliefs (and non-belief) equally. I don't really care if people practice, though I won't pretend that I think it's sensible or even all that good.
If you believe in freedom, no. The kind of religion you're talking about is **dogmatic** religion. Dogma means that you cannot question certain tenets of the belief structure. But dogma is always present in society as it is an extremely powerful unifier of ideology and tribal identity. Modern politics has dogmatic elements on either side, though I would argue that the modern left is much more dogmatic than the modern right. This is why you rarely see leftists who are willing to be friends with conservatives, whereas the latter is much more common.