Pew indicates rise in US religiously unaffiliated

[godfry n. glad]

I got this from CSH today:

Survey shows Non-Religious Outnumber Those of Every Single Faith
(But One)

Americans' Faiths in Flux as More Reject Their Given Religions
Amherst, New York (March 3, 2008)?The most detailed estimates to
date of Americans' religious affiliations reports that a
significant portion of U.S. citizens claim "none of the above,"
placing the unaffiliated second only to Roman Catholics in
number. Monday's release of the 35,000-respondent U.S. Religious
Landscape Survey from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life
shows that 16.1 percent of Americans have no particular religion
at all, while 23.9 percent identify themselves as Catholic. The
next largest "belief group" is Evangelical Baptist at 10.8
percent. All other denominational groupings show in the single
digits or less.

The study also shows the number of Americans who identify as
atheist or agnostic has risen from 3.2 percent to 4 percent,
while a "remarkably high" 44 percent have rejected the religion
placed on them in childhood.

"People are finding out that what they've been handed in youth
doesn't work, or isn't important enough to defend when
confronted with marriage or some other life situation that
forces them to examine it," said Paul Kurtz, founder of the
Council for Secular Humanism. "But when the shuffling is done,
this study shows that three people are dropping religion
altogether for each one gaining a faith."

The study also confirms the previous 2004 Pew Forum-University
of Akron study findings that those who identify as strictly
secular comprise more than 10 percent of the population, only on
a much larger scale.

"The breakdown is interesting, in that it distinguishes between
the vaguely religious and those who fall squarely in the secular
camp," Kurtz said. "But I would venture to say that there is a
significant number of Americans who sympathize with secularism,
but who may still be nominal members of religious organizations.
It's apparent that a significant percentage of the population
identifies with secularism, and I trust politicians will bear
this in mind."

The Council for Secular Humanism is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit
educational organization promoting rational inquiry, secular
values and positive human development through the advancement of
secular humanism. The Council is publisher of the bimonthly
journal Free Inquiry Council for Secular Humanism (www.secularhumanism.org) .

[Caligulette]

I thought the "spiritually flexible" (if you will) aspect of this was a good sign, really- even a jump from one faith to another can be seen as a sign of thought going into the whole thing.

It's a start, anyway.

(My cup is half full, yes?)

[godfry n. glad]

:ffshifty:
Pssst....Just think of Iacchus.

[Doohickie]

a "remarkably high" 44 percent have rejected the religion
placed on them in childhood.

"People are finding out that what they've been handed in youth
doesn't work, or isn't important enough to defend when
confronted with marriage or some other life situation that
forces them to examine it," said Paul Kurtz, founder of the
Council for Secular Humanism.

Oh, that's such a lame interpretation. Case in point: Me. I am exactly what Paul Kurtz would describe as "what they've been handed in youth doesn't work, or isn't important enough to defend when confronted with marriage or some other life situation that forces them to examine it,"

I was raised Catholic. I married a Presbyterian. Eventually I became a Presbyterian. Does that mean the faith of my "youth doesn't work"? No. Does it mean it "isn't important enough to defend when confronted with marriage"? Again, no (and who the heck goes into marriage being "confronted" by it?) Does it mean that I did a careful examination of my faith and found a church that worked well for me in my life situation? Yes.

It used to be that people were not very mobile in terms of ethnic groups, religion, etc. If you were born in the Polish part of town, you stayed in the Polish part of town, married a nice Polish girl and that was that. Chances are she was Catholic just like you. (Or Jewish, or Lutheran, or whatever, depending on your ethnic group.)

Now there is much more social mobility and with that comes more intermarriage between cultural groups and part of that is religion. In my case, my wife and I examined each other's churches relative to our own faiths and eventually we ended up in the Presbyterian Church.

This was not done in "debate" style where either of us felt compelled to "defend" our respective churches. It was done in a search for a good family situation where we could worship together and bring our kids up in a consistent environment. Does that mean the Catholic Church somehow "lost"? No, not really. I still find going to Mass a very spiritual thing (perhaps moreso since I do not attend Mass frequently, but only on special occasions).

Bottom line- this guy likes to spin the numbers to his agenda.

[godfry n. glad]

Ah, but Doohickie... That's merely anecdotal. They have statistics. :wink:

Just because one doesn't affiliate with one of the organizations on the list doesn't mean one isn't a believer. I'd bet that some that are off the chart are really off the chart, but still believers.

Pew. That's who.

[Caligulette]

:ffshifty:
Pssst....Just think of Iacchus.

I don't encounter him much. But I will say that even the search within the parameters of belief is some form of thought and leaves a lot of room for hope. It's better than lockstep obedience.

[Adam]

I dunno, Doohickie, to me that sounds pretty much like what Kurtz is saying. How do you reconcile the differences between Catholicism and Presbyterianism? Do you even bother to? Or are you more concerned with what "...worked well for [you] in [your] life situation" than with fidelity to a particular set of doctrinal standards? If the latter, I'd say that's a fairly secular outlook. I think that's a good thing, mind you.

As far as the OP goes, I do think they're sort of cheating. "Unaffiliated" isn't a monolithic bloc, any more than "Protestant" is, so I don't see why the former gets counted together while the latter does not, except as a way to claim "unaffiliated" is the second largest group.

[Dingfod]

This is the result of "them" taking prayer out of schools. "We" knew the kids would all become godless heathen atheists if that happened. See what you America-hating atheists have caused?

[Doohickie]

I dunno, Doohickie, to me that sounds pretty much like what Kurtz is saying. How do you reconcile the differences between Catholicism and Presbyterianism? Do you even bother to? Or are you more concerned with what "...worked well for [you] in [your] life situation" than with fidelity to a particular set of doctrinal standards? If the latter, I'd say that's a fairly secular outlook. I think that's a good thing, mind you.

I acknowledge there are differences between the two churches. However, in many of those areas where they disagree, I tended toward the Presbyterian viewpoint even before I was introduced to that denomination (thoughts along the lines that blindly following a spiritual leader is not the path to salvation, but following one's conscience is, that sort of thing).

And even outside the Christian faith I think spiritual and moral integrity is more important (and more likely to lead to salvation) than professing a faith in a creed one does not accept. If you, for a moment, accept (or at least pretend) there's a God, I think he would be more impressed with treating others well and living a life of integrity than in following some of the nutcases that preach in his name.

I guess lean universalist in that way. But I wouldn't want to leave my church because I feel the voluntary acceptance of church discipline makes me a better person.

[BrotherMan]

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/funny-pictures-pews-pewing.jpg