The Status of Atheists in America

Whilst in the absence of proof there may not be such a thing as 100% certainty there are indisputably degrees of certainty and uncertainty. Whilst philosophically we must accept that we can never have absolute certainty in the veracity of our knowledge we can still be certain of things to a all practical intents and purposes .For example I am certain that I am a human being on the planet Earth. Is it possible that this is all a dream and that I am a brain in a jar? Indeed. Is it possibe that we all exist in a matrix style pseudo reality? I suppose so. I cannot prove otherwise in either case. Philosophically I must acknowledge such possibilities. However to all practical intents and purposes the degree of certainty I have regarding the nature of my existence is such that I am as sure as I can possibly be that I do exist as a walking, talking breathing human being on the planet Earth.I am equally certain that God does not exist.That is what I mean when I describe myself as an atheist. I don't think the vast majority of either work feverishly at all. To most people (my wife included) time spent on EvC and the like is a pointless waste of time. Most atheists and most theists are getting on with their lives without their beliefs having any major pracical significance whatsoever.
However speaking for myself - When people insist that they "know" God exists or that there is evidence for God (or gods) etc. etc. etc. I obviously think that they are wrong and, frankly, slightly delusional. Belief in such things seems to me to be comparable to belief in Zeus or the tooth fairy. As such I resent the effects and influence of that which I consider to be complete nonsense on society, politics, education and other such area that I consider to be deeply important.More trivially I like a good debate and think that the atheistic argument is so strong that any theistic stance should be able to be demonstrated to be irrational at best and completely mad in the more extreme cases. I suppose I enjoy the mental challenge of making that case. Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

Neither theism nor atheism have anything to do with morality in themselves, except in the sense that the moral codes of theists often relate in some way to their God or Gods. The theist may or may not have a moral taboo against cannabilism, human sacrifice or rape. It depends on the God(s) believed in. Gods themselves are often described as practicing murder, rape, seduction etc.So, with both the theist and atheist, morality might be expressed in a moral philosophy, like those of humanism and Christianity, but the words themselves just divide the world into those who have faith in some kind of God or Gods, and those who don't.Interestingly, the murder rate in your country has declined sharply since the mid-eighties, while the number of atheists has about doubled, so those of your compatriots who fear that a decrease in superstition will lead to a moral breakdown of society appear to have nothing to fear. Add to that the fact that the least religious countries in the west all have lower murder rates than the U.S. while keeping a far lower percentage of their populations in prison, and it almost looks like "bring on the atheism" time, so far as serious misbehaviour is concerned.

Bluegenes writes, While I agree with your post, I think this statement above might just indicate a coincidence rather than a shift due to an actual impact from atheistic conversions. Also note that I don't think there has been a rise in atheism rather I believe atheist have just felt much more comfortable coming 'out-of-the-closet' so to speak. But, yes the theistic should take comfort that there has been an increase in outspoken atheists in the US and the country has not crumbled due to sin.Currently no politician has come out and stated that he/she is atheist, (I believe 1 or 2 have but I don't know which one's), but does anyone really believe that there isn't a handful, if not dozens, of atheist who hold political office? I think it would be safe to assume that many atheist do, they just fear a bad reaction from the public so they stay 'in-the-closet'. Yes, but lets not forget that we here in the US have the God given right to carry guns!!!The murder rates I believe would decrease in this country if that 'Right to Bear Arms' amendment was seriously reconsidered...I can't say much more on that for fear of my governments eaves dropping

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

Sure. It's just that if atheists were significantly more likely to murder, that statistic would be odd. I don't for one minute think that atheists would be less likely to murder than theists because of their godlessness. Even if they were less likely to do so, it wouldn't be because of their atheism, but because factors like being better educated and more prosperous on average might make them less likely to kill. It would be an indirect effect, even if it's there.In the same way, ignorance makes superstition more likely, and it also makes poverty more likely, so it could also make frustration and violence more likely.So do we see both high religiosity and high levels of violence in trailer park and ghetto America, I wonder? What do you think?Here's an interesting British statistic for you. 50% of our Muslim population attend religious services regularly, compared to 5% of the non-Muslim population. Muslims are about 3% of the total population, yet they contribute 12% of our prison population.So, does that mean that devout theists are more likely to commit crime than non-theists? No, not necessarily. The criminals may be more from the non-regular mosque attenders than the regulars.It's probably more a case of ignorance manifesting itself as superstition in some members of the community, and leading to poverty and crime in others (although it could lead to both in many individuals).It's easy to show statistics that give the lie to a common misconception amongst religious people that more religion in a society means a better behaved society.Edited by bluegenes, : typo

I think you are wrong.
Both theists and atheists are likely to be equally morally opposed to the vast majority of "immoral" activities. Canabalism, rape, murder, paedophilia, robbery, backstabbing, bullying, fraud, infidelity etc. etc. etc. There are far far far more commonalities than differences even if your previous examples were to hold true (which I do not think they do)The vast majority of theists I know rarely go to church, consider their faith a personal matter which has little practical impact on their lives, have taken some form of recreational drug at some point in their lives, have no problem with homosexuality, are broadly pro-choice and certainly did not wait to be married before having sex. No different in any practical sense to any of those I know who consider themselves to be atheists. In other words they are normal 21st century adults leading very normal 21st century western lifestyles.When you talk about "theists" you seem to be referring to a minority of God fearing, largely US based, Christians with relatively extreme views on these matters.

Did you know that U.S. atheists have a lower divorce rate than U.S. born again Christians? I love that one. This is funnyWhen you consider that atheists have less of a taboo on divorce than anyone else, it looks as though they might top the ratings on fidelity.

That is funny.A few thoughts, in no particular order.We've been hearing for decades that the divorce rate in America is about 50%. The figures you link to seem inconsistent with that statistic, unless I'm just not figuring it right, which is certainly possible. Can anyone explain this?The conclusion that conservative christians divorce less seems counter-intuitive to me. I would have thought that societal pressures on conservative christians would have made divorce less likely. When something seems counter-intuitive, I look for alternate explanations. One that occurred to me as plausible is that atheists are more likely to live together before marriage, and that those that eventually marry have already survived a lot of the challenges that break relationships up, and thus would be less likely to dissolve the marriage that they eventually enter into.Just in case there's anyone reading this who hasn't been paying attention, I'm not trying to save the reputation of conservative christians. I'm under no illusion that conservative christians are more moral than anyone else. I'm an atheist myself. It's just that the figures are surprising so I'm curious about alternative explanations.

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin FranklinWe see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

I have several friends in the singles ministry at a conservative megachurch that recently hosted a televised political event. At one of their informal house parties, I got into a conversation with someone who had read one or more of Dr. Warren's books -- you know, the eHarmony.com guy.According to what he said about the book, Warren got into the business precisely because of the higher divorce rate among conservative Christians; he wanted to stem the tide and lower that rate. In that conversation -- and please note that I don't know whether the guy was offering his own opinion or repeating something he had read in the book, but either way it was a conservative Christian offering this -- the explanation for the higher divorce rate was that because all other options for expressing their sexuality were barred, young people would rush into marriage too young and end up married to the wrong person.They would probably fare a lot better if they would stop denying human nature and instead learn to understand it and to deal with it in a realistic manner.

An excellent point. Something along those lines was tickling the back of my brain, but it hadn't crystallized enough for me to include it in my thoughts. But it does make sense.

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin FranklinWe see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

Of course. I was thinking of including a frivolous comment in that last post about atheist couples being smart enough to try each other out properly before taking the plunge. Being engaged for most atheists means living together, of course.{ABE} An article on the difficulties of knowing the actual over all rate.http://www.divorcereform.org/nyt05.htmlEdited by bluegenes, : addition

I think I've just figured it, subbie. The 50% is about the percentage of marriages that will eventually end in divorce. What the Barna group have done is list the percentages of all living adults who are divorced. Because that includes those who are not yet married, those who will never marry, and those who are married, destined to divorce, but haven't had time to do it yet, the percentages come out much lower.So, both sets of figures are correct, and for comparison of different groups, it could be done either way. Barna tells us the % of living adult atheists/fundies who have been divorced. The other way would have given us the number of atheist/fundy divorces per. year as a percentage of the number of marriages, and the figures would range around the 50% mark.

I meant just theists in general but in the past when this association of atheists with immorality was being formed. I didn't mean to imply otherwise.I'm not saying that theists don't do the things that they consider immoral, just that they recognize the sinful nature of the behavior. For an atheist to consider nothing wrong with those behaviors would make a theist think that the atheists have less morals, or are more immoral.We're all sinning, but its the recognition of those behaviors as sin that leads the theist to view the athiest as less moral when they see nothing wrong with the behavior.

Do they have a lower marriage rate as well?How does the ratio of divorces to marriages pan out?ABE:from Message 71So... an atheists is no less likely to end a marriage in divorce than a fundy is?Edited by Catholic Scientist, : see ABE

Hi CS, That's very strange reasoning. Let's just get this straight;The atheist considers an action to be perfectly moral and goes ahead with it, considering his actions moral.The theist considers the same action to be immoral, but goes ahead with it anyway. This makes him think that he is more moral than the atheist.That just seems bizarre to me. Surely the theist is less moral, since he is knowingly committing what he considers to be an immoral act?

---

Mutate and Survive

Its not an answer to who is actually more or less moral. Its an answer to how can the theist see the atheist as immoral, or; how did atheism get associated with immorality.