BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US

Subject: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Desert Dancer
Date: 09 Mar 09 - 04:04 PM

You may have seen the A.P.-sourced articles out today on the just-released results of the 2008 American Religious Identification Survey (previous surveys were in 1990 and 2001). The details from the source, Trinity College, are here.

From the report "Highlights" page:

The ARIS 2008 survey was carried out during February-November 2008 and collected answers from 54,461 respondents who were questioned in English or Spanish.

The American population self-identifies as predominantly Christian but Americans are slowly becoming less Christian.

• 86% of American adults identified as Christians in 1990 and 76% in 2008.

• The historic Mainline churches and denominations have experienced the steepest declines while the non-denominational Christian identity has been trending upward particularly since 2001.

• The challenge to Christianity in the U.S. does not come from other religions but rather from a rejection of all forms of organized religion.

34% of American adults considered themselves "Born Again or evangelical Christians" in 2008.

The U. S. population continues to show signs of becoming less religious, with one out of every five Americans failing to indicate a religious identity in 2008.

• The "Nones" (no stated religious preference, atheist, or agnostic) continue to grow, though at a much slower pace than in the 1990s, from 8.2% in 1990, to 14.1% in 2001, to 15.0% in 2008.

----

I've heard lots of stats of this sort thrown about recently, and have often wondered where they come from and if they're correct. It's useful to go to the source (or, at least one, that seems reliable), and also have the latest numbers.

~ Becky in Tucson

Subject: RE: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: michaelr
Date: 09 Mar 09 - 06:44 PM

"The U. S. population continues to show signs of becoming less religious..."

Thank god for that!

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Mar 09 - 10:46 PM

"The U. S. population continues to show signs of becoming less religious..."

As a churchgoer, I think I'd agree the apparent decline in religiosity is a good thing. When there was a social requirement to belong to a religion, many of the people who belonged to churches, didn't have a clue about the essence of the religious faith they claimed to profess. They were in church because they thought they were supposed to be in church, not because they wanted to be there. Now that society allows church attendance to be voluntary, the churches are much healthier. We can collect money to serve the poor, not to build bigger churches to hold more people.

The growth in the so-called "non-denominational Christian" churches is something I don't quite understand. Much of this growth is in what I'd call "megachurches." I don't understand why they're so attractive. But hey, even some of the megachurches are becoming involved in social justice issues.

The so-called "mainline" churches have done a wonderful job of cleaning up their act. The Episcopalians, who once were closely associated with three-martini luncheons, have taken the lead in social justice and tolerance issues. The Lutherans, better known for Jello molds, are not far behind in the area of social justice, and in the exploration of various expressions of spirituality. The United Church of Christ (Congregationalists) and the United Methodists (who no longer prohibit card-playing and dancing) are also quite impressive. We Catholics are a mixed bag - but in many places, a lot of good is being done by the Catholic Church, especially in the area of service to the poor and immigrants.

So, all in all, I think the decline in religious membership may be a good thing - because it has been accompanied by a growth in religious faith and in work for social justice and tolerance.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Mar 09 - 10:52 PM

It's an indication of an interesting 'trend'. I wouldn't make TOO much of it...yet. The majority still seem to be religious, and as Joe says, it may be just that people are being clearer about their positions.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: wysiwyg
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 10:03 AM

Good post, Joe. I agree.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Wesley S
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 11:15 AM

"while the non-denominational Christian identity has been trending upward particularly since 2001."

I'm not entirely convinced that some of these non-denominational megachurchs are what they profess to be. I'm pretty sure that if you scratch the surface a little bit you'll find one of the mainline churchs just below the surface. But they are smart enough to figure out that they can attract more folks if they dress up the presentation a little bit. Of course - I could be wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: wysiwyg
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 12:41 PM

They work because they use the "worldly" marketing approach. They scratch an itch and they focus well on "self." They ALSO can (and do) do some good. Some are more "real deal" than others.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Mrrzy
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 12:59 PM

It will be nice when there are more realists than mythists, or whatever the term could be...

But what always surprises me is that with almost 10 times the number of jews, why the nonreligious are so politically weak. It's amazing how powerful the jewish lobby is when there are so many more "none's"...

Another anecdote: I found out that one of my cousins on the Quaker side was raising his kids jewish, and I said to Liz, the wife, I didn't know you were Jewish, I thought you were an atheist, and she said Oh, aren't those the same thing?

Also, does non-denominational still mean Christian? Or would you include, say, a hospital chaplain who does all three monotheisms, regardless of breakdown (Catholic-Protestant, Sunni-Shi'ite, or whatever)?

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: wysiwyg
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 01:08 PM

I said to Liz, the wife, I didn't know you were Jewish, I thought you were an atheist, and she said Oh, aren't those the same thing?

There is a substantial number of folks whose ethnic heritage or cultural alignment are Jewish who do not ascribe to the religion. But who identify strongly with either or both of the positives or negatives associated with Jewish tradition.

And then there are also Jews who identify strongly as Jews who are also Christians. As well as committed Christians who also identify closely as Jews.

There's just aren't any hard and fast divisions, when it comes to individuals. Surveys and polls always impose them by statistical necessity, but I think it's usually better news that the "lines" are blurrier than the stats can show. Just as in some ways we're getting a browner nation (US-speak), we're getting a blurrier nation when it comes to spirituality. (It's my opinion that Obama's election reflects that as much or more than his "causing" it.)

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Mrrzy
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 01:34 PM

Yes, I always liked the inherent contradiction in being both jewish and christian. But hey, thread creep, right? Not you, of course (BG!)!

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: SINSULL
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 01:36 PM

"34% of American adults considered themselves "Born Again or evangelical Christians" in 2008."

Is that a typo? Born again? Evangelical?

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: wysiwyg
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 01:46 PM

SRS-- best post at Mudcat in..... ages.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: pdq
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 01:47 PM

86% of American adults identified as Christians in 1990 and 76% in 2008
Perhaps people should ask themselves "was this a better place to live in 1990 than it is now?"

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: john f weldon
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 02:06 PM

I find that many people have a rather vague religion; a feeling rather than a belief. Something out there; the Tao? the Force?

The result is that they can, with total honesty, characterize themselves as believers or non-believers depending on social norms.

It was notable that in Quebec in the mid-sixties, religious belief dropped off spectacularly. Was it actual belief, or just reportage?

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Wesley S
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 02:15 PM

"But what always surprises me is that with almost 10 times the number of jews, why the nonreligious are so politically weak"

That suprises me too. But folks who go to church get together at least once a week in large and small groups that have similar beliefs. When do athiests get together? They don't - at least that I'm aware of. It sounds like the key is to get organized. How is that going to happen? It's like the old Will Rogers joke - "I'm not a member of an organized political party.... I'm a Democrat."

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: frogprince
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 02:26 PM

"34% of American adults considered themselves "Born Again or evangelical Christians" in 2008."

If I get your question right, no, it wouldn't be a typo; those are just two interchangeable designations, either of which that 34% find acceptable for themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: SINSULL
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 02:53 PM

The large number surprises me. I have known (personally) only two evangelical/born again Christians in my entire life. I live in the Northeast US.
I have worked for and with many more but nowhere near 34% of the adults I come in contact with.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: frogprince
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 03:21 PM

I looked back through the thread, thinking it was up there somewhere that I just saw an observation that the Northeast is the least religious section of the U.S. To the degree that's true, Sinsull, it might explain your puzzlement. As one who has lived somewhere in the Midwest except for 4 Navy years and a couple of years in Arkansas, that doesn't look high to me at all.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Wesley S
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 03:28 PM

Come down to the south and ask around. You'll find out where those numbers come from.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Riginslinger
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 06:03 PM

America's numbers would look a lot better if the government would only do something about illegal immigration.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Amos
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 07:29 PM

What was Stilly's post? It appears to be gone now?


A

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: wysiwyg
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 07:43 PM

No, I think I thought I was in another thread. Strokebrain.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 07:43 PM

I have noticed the post eaters are running a bit wild again.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: wysiwyg
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 07:46 PM

I am correct that I was in the wrong open window and have reposted the kudos in the appropriate thread.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Peace
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 07:54 PM

The stats as cited seem to pertain to the USA. Something that affected the numbers in Canada has to do with the Federal Census which takes place every ten years. The last I contributed to in what I recall as being about 300 questions (about 1 in 20 people had to do the long census form and I was one of them) was in 2000 I think. Anyway, the person who delivered the census to where I live started by telling me that I had to answer--under pain of facing dire unspecified consequences from the Federal Government--EVERY question on the form. Since I have a reluctance to take 'threats' from anyone I told him to shove the form up his anal sphincter. I closed the door. The following day a lady came to deliver the form. She was much more pleasant about it. I accepted the form.

When it came to questions about religion I wrote a short discourse that said, in essence, "My religious beliefs are none of your business." It is now nine years later and I have yet to be sent to Canada's gulag (possibly they think living in Albertais punishment enough).


BTW, I encountered a GREAT joke the other day.

You know you're in an Alberta hotel when you call the front desk and say "I gotta leak in the bathroom sink" and the front desk says, "Go ahead."

I seem to have drifted off topic. Anyway, the census forms from earlier years (1990, 1980, etc) seem to have listed religions and there was a special category that read 'other' and I think one for 'none'. That meant that an atheistic druid with overtones of idol worship either had to say so in writing BS an answer on the form. I'm not sure if we've ever had an accurate accounting of those figures in Canada.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Riginslinger
Date: 10 Mar 09 - 09:44 PM

Peace - Yeah, I can see how that would be a bitch for Druids, "None" wouldn't work and "Other" seems too shallow.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Desert Dancer
Date: 11 Mar 09 - 12:03 AM

Peace, it's a different situation in the U.S.

Under "Methodology", they say:

"The value of this unique series of national surveys, which allows scientific monitoring of change over time, has been recognized by the U.S. Bureau of the Census. The Bureau itself is constitutionally precluded from such an inquiry into religion, and so has incorporated NSRI/ARIS findings into its official publication the Statistical Abstract of the United States since 2003."

The survey used an "unprompted, open-ended key question "What is your religion, if any?" Interviewers did not prompt or offer a suggested list of potential answers. Moreover, the self-description of respondents was not based on whether established religious bodies or institutions considered them to be members. To the contrary, the surveys sought to determine whether the respondents regarded themselves as adherents of a religious community. The surveys tap subjective rather than objective standards of religious identification."

However, then they had to categorize the responses they got...

They also note:

"The population we know least about, those who do not know or refuse to reveal their religious identification, grew the most rapidly. This reflects social changes in attitudes and in American society over the past two decades. There is less willingness to participate in surveys of all types by the American public. Although this leaves a lacuna in the ARIS statistics the overall rate of refusal to participate is low by international standards. For example, the rate of refusal to the religion question in the national U.K. Government 2001 Census was higher at seven percent." (It was 5.2% in the 2008 U.S. data.)

I think there are interesting depths to be plumbed in these data. We often surround ourselves with, or at least relate most closely to people who have similar world views. Sometimes that's exacerbated by larger geographical effects on the population we're in. As we've seen in the past couple years of politics, people tend to operate as if everyone believes like they do, and those who disagree are in a neglegable minority. It's useful to have some pretty objective data to say what's really out there.

There were three sets of questions: the first being a couple of simple questions to have the interviewee identify their religion (or lack thereof, the second detailing specific beliefs/behaviors, and the third being a variety of demographic measures. I think it's too bad that the second set were only used with a subset of 1000, rather than the 54,461 for the rest.

Those questions (here) were an interesting assortment, and the results are not reported there (except for the "existance of God" question, and the baptism/marriage/funeral questions), though they're touched on a bit in the text. They've got more reporting and analysis to do.

~ Desert Dancer

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Desert Dancer
Date: 11 Mar 09 - 12:13 AM

Their "Taxonomy of the Religious Traditions"

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Mar 09 - 10:52 AM

That's all very interesting, Desert Dancer. Personally, I think it's all a function of evolution.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Mrrzy
Date: 11 Mar 09 - 12:04 PM

The Protestants having speciated into Episcopalians, Methodists, Lutherans, etc?

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: wysiwyg
Date: 11 Mar 09 - 12:36 PM

No... "The Protestants" is more an adjectival term describing denominational commonalities, not a mother-church from which other churches split off.

And BTW the Episcopals are both catholic and protestant-- the middle way.

[insert master's level Church History summary here], LOL.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Desert Dancer
Date: 11 Mar 09 - 01:03 PM

I'd like to see the data on the answers to

NS-1 Do you think that human beings, as we know them, developed from earlier species of animals?

and


NS-2 Do you think that a horoscope can predict your future?

~ Becky in Tucson

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: wysiwyg
Date: 11 Mar 09 - 01:30 PM

I'd like to know how they could sweep all Jews into one category.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Amos
Date: 11 Mar 09 - 02:20 PM

'PIskies may be the "middle way", but the question remains, "The middle of what?". DOn't get me started!! :D


A

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Mrrzy
Date: 11 Mar 09 - 02:48 PM

The same way you can sweep Christians and Moslems into categories, WYSIWYG.
Do you believe in the one God of Abraham? Yes = all three.

Do you believe that Jesus was the Messiah (the offspring of that God on Earth sent to Save Us From Our Sins)? Yes = Christians, No = the other 2.

Do you believe that Mohammed was a true prophet in that the One God revealed His word directly to him? Yes = Moslem, No = the other 2.

Are you one of the original Chosen People (ie of Hebrew descent, especially - and sometimes only - maternally)? Yes = Jewish, No = the other 2. Note that this one isn't a question of belief but of ancestry, so in some minds you can't avoid it (like, the Nazis in WWII, and American Jews thereafter). Thus you can not believe in this God and still be Jewish. I, personally, would say "of Hebrew ancestry" in those cases, which would be closer to the truth as people understand the word Jewish. Not to mention that the Hebrews started calling themselves Jews when they decided to dedicate their existence to their God in the hopes of less future persecution, way back in the olden days. makes you wonder how that's working out for everybody...

So:
You can be Jewish by descent and believe that the Messiah has already come in the person of Jesus, which would make you both Christian and Jewish.
You can believe in both Jesus as Messiah and Mohammed as True Prophet, and be thus both Christian and Moslem. If you're Jewish by descent as well, I guess that would make you a Panabrahamite?

And I guess if you're not Jewish by descent but you believe in that God, but neither that Jesus was Christ {note the title, it's not a name} nor that God spoke to Mohammed, and then you would be Jewish.

Yes, these are gross generalities, but the terms Moslem, Christian and Jewish are gross generalities.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: wysiwyg
Date: 11 Mar 09 - 02:56 PM

Amos, I think the sentence was pretty clear as to context:

"the Episcopals are both catholic and protestant-- the middle way."

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Mar 09 - 04:07 PM

I know that when I attended services at a BIG Episcopal church in St. Louis on the first Sunday of Advent many years ago, it sure FELT very Catholic. Very complex, impressive ceremony....and since I had spent the previous Sunday at a tiny Free Will Baptist church in Mississippi, it was quite a culture shock.
I have only been to Catholic Mass about 3 times, but to many Methodist & Unitarian services, so 'middle way' seems pretty apt. for the Episcopalians

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 11 Mar 09 - 04:10 PM

I suspect Amos reference to Piskies (Cornish pixies) as a middle way, was a kind of joking pagan attempt at derailment of this religious discussion.

Although I could be wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Mar 09 - 07:46 PM

"The Protestants having speciated into Episcopalians, Methodists, Lutherans, etc?"


Poly-theists to mono-theists to Catholics to Protestants to Agnostics to ...

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Ron Davies
Date: 11 Mar 09 - 11:24 PM

Remember the old song:

I am an Anglican
I am PE
Not High Church
Not Low Church
But Protestant, Episcopal and free
Not a Luther
Not a Presby
Not a Baptist--white with foam
I am an Anglican
Just one step from Rome
I am an Anglican
Just one step from Rome


I think that's the way it went.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Donuel
Date: 11 Mar 09 - 11:36 PM

I endeavor to remain free from religion however I do raise my older son as a Zoraster and my younger son as Amish.

"No you can't play computer games like your brother, you're Amish. Now go to bed its almost 7"

From 40 years of study it seems to me that no religions of today diverge far from the Egyptian Horus story of resurection.
The names change but the story is basicly the same.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 Mar 09 - 07:46 AM

It's time to start working on plot development!

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: frogprince
Date: 12 Mar 09 - 10:32 AM

Plot development? Good grief!; developers have built all over miles of farm land, and now you want them to build things on burial plots, too?...

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Amos
Date: 12 Mar 09 - 11:00 AM

The Middle Way is a widely used expression describing the Buddhist--not Christian--tenet of steering away from extremes of both desire and resistance. It also appears in the Taoist tradition.

To characterize a Christian sect as being a "middle way" is ironic, in respect of the many arbitrary and authoritarian icons and precepts with which such sects tend to garnishee their teachings.

While I understand this is not the literal meaning of the context as written, I can scarcely credit that the use of that phrase was wholly accidental.

A

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Wesley S
Date: 12 Mar 09 - 11:26 AM

"To characterize a Christian sect as being a "middle way" is ironic, in respect of the many arbitrary and authoritarian icons and precepts with which such sects tend to garnishee their teachings."

Again - you're painting with a very broad brush. Some "sects" do and some "sects" don't. We would have to talk about them one at a time for this to have any sort of validity.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Amos
Date: 12 Mar 09 - 12:11 PM

Well, that's true, they vary widely. But all Christian sects, for example, use the image of brutal execution on the Cross as a symbol of focus for worship of Infinite Grace, or whatever you call It. And all that I have encountered require acceptance of the executee as a sole intermediary between the individual and the divine. I take strong exception to both these arbitrary detours.


A

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Wesley S
Date: 12 Mar 09 - 01:28 PM

"And all that I have encountered "

Thanks - that the qualifier I was looking for. Exactly how much investigation into these icons have you done? Listen - I'm not fond of the cross image either. But as a promotional image it's an easier one to portray - two lines that bisect each other - than the image of a rock being rolled away from a cave. And the rock/cave image is more of an accurate depiction of the theology that many of us like to follow.

In the early days of the Christian church - when you could easily be punished for belonging - they needed a quick and easy way of letting people know they were members. The cross filled that purpose. But granted - there are many modern "sects" that focus way too much of their time and energy {in my opinion} on the S/M factor of the story.

What I'm saying is that not all crosses are alike. Some are very simple and don't focus on the pain and suffering. Some are used to represent transition. That people have the ability to change their lives in dramatic ways. Nothing would be more difficult to overcome than death. And if Christ did overcome death {and wheather he actually did or not is neither here nor there as far as I'm concerned} then we should be able to overcome whatever obstacles are in our path.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Mar 09 - 01:39 PM

Zorastrian/Amish? Gee...they should meet MY son, who 'chose' being Taoist. ☺. Now all you need is Jewish diet, Mormon attitudes and Unitarian 'hymns' to make home life really interesting!

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: M.Ted
Date: 12 Mar 09 - 11:23 PM

Here is the classic article Did You Really Go to Church this Week? Behind the Poll Data.

Here's a quote:

"Several years ago we teamed up with sociologist Mark Chaves to test the 40 percent figure for church attendance. Our initial study, based on attendance counts in Protestant churches in one Ohio county and Catholic churches in 18 dioceses, indicated a much lower rate of religious participation than the polls report. Instead of 40 percent of Protestants attending church, we found 20 percent. Instead of 50 percent of Catholics attending church, we found 28 percent. In other words, actual church attendance was about half the rate indicated by national public opinion polls."

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 13 Mar 09 - 04:00 AM

M. Ted -

At one church with which I had "intimate contact" some decades back, they claimed a membership of about 1200. Attendance on most Sundays was fewer than 30. Attendance on Easter Sunday, and sometimes a couple of Sundays around Christmas, was at the ~300 seat capacity of the sanctuary, of course.

Three of the "holiday" attendees made substantioal "offerings" when they attended, and in one year one of the deacons let slip that those three accounted for nearly 60% of the annual "income" for the church.

This was the "family church" an ex-wife had attended as a child, and she professed a desire to resume participation. When she insisted "we" should make a "pledge" my advice was that she was free to put $20 in the plate each time she attended; but if she didn't go she didn't promise to give. By the end of the year (about 7 months), she had put $43 in (she sometimes forgot to check to see that she had $20 before leaving for a service), and three of the deacons came by to invite her to a special service at which they intended to honor their "top dozen donors" from among the regular attendees, and I believe they said she was number 6 on the list.

While this is an "isolated example" my broader experience is that she was "quite typical" of the majority of persons I've known who would say they are XXXX-kind-of Christians, but don't really think enough about it to have any real beliefs one way or another. They know only that they are "supposed to believe something" and that (in Kansas at least) it is dangerous (sometimes physically, but usually just socially and professionally) to NOT APPEAR to be (name some favorite faith). There is a separate but much smaller population - the ones who make it dangerous not to "believe" - who are, of course, much more enthusiastic.

Note that this is not to denigrate the beliefs of anyone here. We are a community of "intellectuals" here; and most of those who speak of such things here are capable of demonstrating at least a "thought mode" in their discourse that is not typical of the larger population of "herd (non)thinkers."

John

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: robomatic
Date: 13 Mar 09 - 08:20 PM

Mrzzy:
you writted:
Not to mention that the Hebrews started calling themselves Jews when they decided to dedicate their existence to their God in the hopes of less future persecution, way back in the olden days. makes you wonder how that's working out for everybody...

where did you get that amazingly wrongheaded sentence from? I've never heard it before and it has no relation to truth so I'm really curious.

Subject: RE: BS: ARIS: the numbers on religion in the US
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 Mar 09 - 09:21 PM

Well, I guess then, we'll all continue to wonder why the Hebrews started calling themselves Jews.