GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Hallelujah! U.S. Church Membership Rate Fall Below 50%

Godless Wednesday makes a rare return to the blog with the amazing news that membership in houses of worship (churches, synagogues, mosques, etc) has fallen below 50% (to 47%) for the first time ever that Gallup has been measuring it. As recently as 1999 (when The Matrix came out) the worship rate was 70%. Gallup says:

The decline in church membership is primarily a function of the increasing number of Americans who express no religious preference. Over the past two decades, the percentage of Americans who do not identify with any religion has grown from 8% in 1998-2000 to 13% in 2008-2010 and 21% over the past three years.

As would be expected, Americans without a religious preference are highly unlikely to belong to a church, synagogue or mosque, although a small proportion -- 4% in the 2018-2020 data -- say they do. That figure is down from 10% between 1998 and 2000.

Given the nearly perfect alignment between not having a religious preference and not belonging to a church, the 13-percentage-point increase in no religious affiliation since 1998-2000 appears to account for more than half of the 20-point decline in church membership over the same time.

This is excellent news because the decrease in religiosity of Americans will hopefully lead to an increase in fact-based, evidence-based decision-making and public policies. (One can dream!)

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: "Hate The Belief, Not The Believer"

BOOK REVIEW: The Sparrow by Mary Doria Russell

I have been procrastinating reading The Sparrow for a very long time. I have been curious about this 1997 book because of the over 50,000 ratings on Goodreads with an average well above 4.0/5.0 (53,447 at 4.17 as of 9/1/19). I was aware of the acclaim and many plaudits (The Clarke, Tiptree and BSFA awards) it had received and was intrigued by a blurb which describes a first-contact mission organized by Jesuits and reviews which mention that the book will be loved by “believers and non-believers” alike. I’m here to tell you that I seriously doubt the last assertion is true. While I do appreciate the overwhelmingly positive reviews for The Sparrow and though I have multiple reasons for not enjoying the book as much as the average reviewer, my disappointment was not rooted in religion but science, i.e. not my lack of belief in God or a higher power but my inability to suspend belief about (micro)biology. 

My review of The Sparrow is not intended to be a negative one; the writing is excellent, the plotting brilliant (the two time lines set in 2019 and 2059 are devastatingly executed). The structure of the story is such that we see the events leading up to discovery of the existence of intelligent life, the details of the preparation and journey to their planet, and the meeting between humans and aliens on the planet of Rakhat in the Alpha Centauri system. All of that is well done and quite compelling, if a little unbelievable due to the notion it would be spearheaded by the Society of Jesus in the 21st century. However it is the second, future time line (after the ultimately catastrophic and tragic events of the first time line) which really elevates The Sparrow; it transforms the book into a moral mystery novel, because the reader is constantly trying to reconcile the main characters’ behavior in the early time line with how they are (achingly slowly revealed) in the later time line. That dramatic tension alone may be enough for some readers to satisfy and thrill them. Sadly, for me it wasn’t, although it did provide me with enough energy to complete the book.

The primary source of my dissatisfaction for The Sparrow is not (entirely) based in its attempt to make one of its central plots revolve around the faith (or loss of faith) of a handsome Jesuit priest, Father Emilio Sandoz, the main character of the novel. I simply was unable to completely disregard the likely existence and presence of microscopic pathogens on an alien planet. When the humans meet the aliens they interact with them like they are “First World” colonists visiting “Third World” lands on Earth. There’s no breathing apparatus, concern that flora and fauna that is alien may also be deadly. It’s such a fantastical and facile choice that it took me out of the story so dramatically that I was unable to return. I was very surprised by this choice because there are so many examples in classic science fiction where the dangers of alien microbiology are key plot points (The War of the Worlds by H.G. Wells, Aurora by Kim Stanley Robinson, Children of Ruin by Adrian Tchaikovsky are just a few that come immediately to mind.) It is very possible that I may be one of the few readers that feel this way. 

In fact, I would barely call The Sparrow a work of science fiction. It’s aims and contexts are sociological, anthropological and philosophical, not scientific. (Of course there exist works of science fiction which share some or all of these aims.) That’s fine, but that’s not the reason why I read science fiction. "Science" is right there in the name! The Sparrow completely ignores vast segments of scientific knowledge in pursuit of telling a particular story. (I would explicitly name microbiology and engineering as areas the author, or at least the text, seems to deliberately ignore.) I am somewhat curious about the sequel, Children of God, and will probably read it at some point. However, even though Father Sandoz's story arc in The Sparrow  is compelling and life on Rakhat is intriguing I’m also in no hurry to return there any time soon.

Title: The Sparrow.
Author: Mary Doria Russell.
Paperback: 416 pages.
Publisher: Ballantine Books.
Date Published: May 27, 2008 (First Published 1996).
Date Read: August 28, 2019.

GOODREADS RATING: ★★★☆☆  (3.0/5.0).

OVERALL GRADE: B+/B (3.16/4.0).

PLOT: B-.
IMAGERY: B.
IMPACT: B+.
WRITING: A.

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Aussie Rugby Star Dismissed Over Religious-Based Homophobic Comments

Israel Folau, a star rugby player in Australia has repeatedly made multiple homophobic comments on social media that are religious-based (they usually involve a statement that "homosexuals" will go to hell if they do not "repent" or "God's plan for homosexuals was hell"). Interestingly, Rugby Australia has announced that it intends to cancel his lucrative playing contract for violations of its "code of conduct":

“At its core, this is an issue of the responsibilities an employee owes to their employer and the commitments they make to their employer to abide by their employer’s policies and procedures and adhere to their employer’s values. 

“Following the events of last year, Israel was warned formally and repeatedly about the expectations of him as player for the Wallabies and NSW Waratahs with regards to social media use and he has failed to meet those obligations. It was made clear to him that any social media posts or commentary that is in any way disrespectful to people because of their sexuality will result in disciplinary action. 

“All professional Rugby players in Australia are bound by the Code of Conduct and there is a process in place for any disciplinary matter. We appreciate that this particular matter will attract significant interest, but due process must be followed.”

The Rugby Australia code of conduct includes a provision that prohibits denigrating people on social media based on their "gender, gender identity or sexual orientation" so I presume this is one reason for the dismissal. Folau has announced that he is appealing his loss of a $4m contract so the controversy may continue for quite awhile.

Curious how different people can read the same religious text and come to completely different conclusions about whether it endorses anti-LGBT views. It's almost like the text is just a pretext for beliefs and ideas they had anyway and wanted a reason to express.

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: "Nones" Become Largest Religious Group In The United States

Woo hoo! Fear not godless heathens, you are not alone! The Friendly Atheist reports on the latest polling data from the General Social Survey on religion that shows that the percentage of Americans who say that have "no religion" (often called the "Nones" by demographers) is now the largest segment of the population.

Religious News Service reports (and includes the graphic at the top of this post):

According to newly released General Social Survey data analyzed by Ryan P. Burge of Eastern Illinois University, Americans claiming “no religion” — sometimes referred to as “nones” because of how they answer the question “what is your religious tradition?” — now represent about 23.1 percent of the population, up from 21.6 percent in 2016. People claiming evangelicalism, by contrast, now represent 22.5 percent of Americans, a slight dip from 23.9 percent in 2016.  

That makes the two groups statistically tied with Catholics (23 percent) as the largest religious — or nonreligious — groupings in the country.   

“Nones have been on the march for a long time now,” Burge said. “It’s been a constant, steady increase for 20 years now. If the trend line kept up, we knew this was going to happen.”

So when will public policy (and politics) start recognizing this fact that the populace (and electorate) is changing?

Hat/tip to Friendly Atheist

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments Today in Church-State Separation Case

Today the United States Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments in an important case involving the separation of church and state. The case is The American Legion v. American Humanist Association and involves a 93-year-old World War 1 memorial called the Bladensburg Peace Cross erected on public lands and maintained using public funds in Bladensburg, Maryland.

The questions before the Court are:

(1) Whether a 93-year-old memorial to the fallen of World War I is unconstitutional merely because it is shaped like a cross; (2) whether the constitutionality of a passive display incorporating religious symbolism should be assessed under the tests articulated in Lemon v. Kurtzman, Van Orden v. Perry, Town of Greece v. Galloway or some other test; and (3) whether, if the test from Lemon v. Kurtzman applies, the expenditure of funds for the routine upkeep and maintenance of a cross-shaped war memorial, without more, amounts to an excessive entanglement with religion in violation of the First Amendment.

NPR's Nina Totenberg claims that the Court is expected to reverse the 4th Circuit's holding that the monument has the "primary effect of endorsing religion and excessively entangles the government in religion." The real question is how far will the Court's conservative majority go in dismantling the wall between church and state in this case?

Hat/tip to SCOTUSblog

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Let Reason Prevail...

The Freedom from Religion Foundation is making banners available this holiday to combat the overwhelming religiosity of the occasion. One of these appeared in San Diego's Balboa Park next to a nativity display The banner reads:

 “There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. 
 There is only our natural world.
 Religion is but a myth & superstition that hardens hearts & enslaves minds.”

For lots of people, seeing such thoughts expressed in public may seem shocking or disrespectful but from my perspective as a godless person this reaction demonstrates how prous the wall between the church and the state have become.

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Poll Says Atheism Is No Longer An Impediment To Elected Office

Previously I have blogged (repeatedly) about Americans uneasiness with voting for an atheist for president. However, a new survey from the American Humanist shows that progressive voters (who are pro-marriage equality and pro-choice) are happy to support an agnostic or atheist candidate for elected office.

The survey finds that 72% of liberal Democrats would vote for an atheist on the ballot. 74% of them would support a more generic “non-religious” or “agnostic” candidate.
Also interesting? 14% of those voters said they would be more likely to support an atheist while only 7% say the opposite.

Hat/tip to Friendly Atheist.

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Ireland Votes To Abolish Blasphemy Laws

This past weekend voters in Ireland decided to abolish laws against blasphemy by approving a  referendum to remove the word "blasphemous" from the following clause in the constitution of the republic of Ireland:

The publication or utterance of blasphemous, seditious, or indecent matter is an offence which shall be punishable in accordance with law.

There was also a 2009 law on the books (the Defamation Act of 2009) which included blasphemy as an offense and had never been used but came to public notice in 2015 when openly gay actor Stephen Fry was investigated by the Irish police (after a complaint by an unknown  member of the public) for saying on Irish television "The god that created this universe, if it was created by a god, is quite clearly a maniac, utter maniac, totally selfish." Fry's potential legal jeopardy put the issue on the map, which eventually led to the referendum this week in which 64.85%  voted YES (43% turnout) to remove blasphemy from the Irish constitution. The government will follow with legislation to implement the will of the people to abolish the "crime" of blasphemy.

Good news!

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Deism versus Theism

As someone who believes in godlessness, i.e. I reject both theism and deism. However, it is at least useful to understand these terms if one is going to have reasonable dialogue between the religious and irreligious. For example, the graphic at the top of this page explains the difference between theism and deism.

One of the more annoying aspects of interactions between believers and non-believers is the ignorance of "believers" about the diversity of people's beliefs. I have found that most people who are godless like myself are not that way because "we don't know better" or "haven't been exposed to religion." Really? You think in a world dominated by religion and religious voices like this one, you think people turn away from religion because we haven't been exposed to the right one, which just happens to be yours?

Hat/tip to Atheistic_1

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Stephen Hawking Says "There Is No God" In Posthumous Book

Stephen Hawking, one of the world's most renowned scientists, who died earlier this year at the age of 76 on March 13, has published a book where he reiterates his atheistic beliefs. This is not a new occurrence; Hawking's atheistic beliefs have been well-documented.

For example, this is a quote which comes close to what I believe as well,

We are each free to believe what we want and it is my view that the simplest explanation is there is no God. No one created the universe and no one directs our fate.

As always, Hawking expresses the truth in a simple, declarative way.

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Secular Coalition Announces Freethinking Caucus in Congress

The Secular Coalition for America announced that there is going to be a congressional caucus for "free-thinkers." The newly announced Congressional Freethought Congress even has a mission statement:

• First, to promote public policy on the basis of reason, science, and moral values;
• Second, to protect the secular character of our government by adhering to the strict constitutional principle of the separation of church and state;
• Third, to oppose discrimination against atheists, agnostics, humanists, seekers, and the nonreligious, and to champion the value of freedom of thought and conscience worldwide; and
• Fourth, to provide a forum for Members of Congress to discuss their moral frameworks, ethical values, and personal religious journeys.

Jerry McNerney (CA-9), the only member of congress with a PhD in mathematics, has agreed to be the co-chair of the Freethought Caucus. I am not sure who the other member of the Caucus is, but presumably that in addition to Jared Huffman (CA-2) they will be from another state other than California!

Hat/tip to Friendly Atheist

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Dawkins Responds To "What If You're Wrong?"

For today's Godless Wednesday we have a treat for you. At the top of this post is a fun video of Richard Dawkins responding to a supposed "gotcha" question from a religious student at Liberty University and gives a near perfect reply.

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Dawkins Scale of Godlessness

I must confess than even though I own the book The God Delusion I have not read it, so I was unaware of author Richard Dawkins' "spectrum of theistic probability." It is more commonly known as the Dawkins scale, somewhat reminiscent of the Kinsey scale, which posits that sexual orientation exists on a spectrum where 0 is completely heterosexual and 7 is completely homosexual (I'm a 7 on the Kinsey scale). The Dawkins Scale can be summarized as:

1. Strong theist. 100% probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: "I do not believe, I know."
2. De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100%. "I don't know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."
3. Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50% but not very high. "I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God."
4. Completely impartial. Exactly 50%. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."
5. Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50% but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."
6. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. "I don't know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."
7. Strong atheist. "I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung knows there is one."

I don't think that I am actually a 7 on the Dawkins scale, I would definitely say I am at the very least a 6. Dawkins himself says that he is a 6.9. Take the survey!

Where are you in the Dawkins scale?

Create your own user feedback survey

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Another Survey Confirms Increase In Godlessness In United States

Another study of Americans has documented the rise in the "religiously unaffiliated" which we like to call "godlessness" at this blog. The Houston Chronicle reports about a study commissioned by the Desert News (a Mormon-affiliated publication) and  the Center for the Study of Elections and Democracy at Brigham Young University which documents that a plurality of Americans (the largest group in the survey) respond "None" when asked their religious affiliation.

34 percent of respondents said they had no religious denomination, compared to 33 percent who identified as Protestants and  21 percent who said they are Catholic.
[...]
Baptists made up the largest Protestant group, at about 32 percent, with 19 percent saying they belonged to a non-denominational or independent church. Twenty-eight percent of those surveyed consider themselves "born-again" or Evangelical Christians.
Thirty-seven percent of respondents say religion is very important in their lives, but only 24 percent say they attend religious services one or more times a week. Fifty-four percent said they seldom or never attend church.
Of those polled, 21 percent said one of the most important issues facing families is "decline in religious faith and church attendance.

Interesting results, eh? I wonder when public policy and politics will start responding to how Americans actually live their religious lives, instead of how people "wish" (or "believe") they do.

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: "Nones" Projected To Be Plurality In 2035

By 2030 the largest religious affiliation in the United States is predicted to be "none." A computer science professor has analyzed poll responses from the General Social Survey to this question "What is your religious preference: is it Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, some other religion, or no religion?" since 1972 and he makes the above prediction that America is becoming increasingly less religious and that sometime in the next two decades the non-religious will be the largest single religious group in the country.

In fact he says this is probably an under-estimate, for the following reasons:

1. Survey results like these are subject to social desirability bias, which is the tendency of respondents to shade their answers in the direction they think is more socially acceptable. To the degree that apostasy is stigmatized, we expect these reports to underestimate the number of Nones. As the visibility of nonreligious people increases, they might be more willing to be counted; in that case, the trends would go faster than predicted.

1. The trends for Protestants and Nones have apparent points of inflection near 1990. Predictions that include earlier data are likely to underestimate future trends. If we use only data since 1990 to generate predictions, we expect the fraction of Nones to exceed 40 percent within 20 years.

So even though it seems to godless people like yours truly that "believers" are trampling the rights of non-believers. Or at the very least the concerns of believers "trump" those of non-believers, it appears as if the tide will turn in the future.

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Most Americans Believe In Church-State Separation

A new poll from the Pew Research Center re-affirms the notion that most Americans believe that religion and government policy should be separated. This idea is usually described as a "wall between church and state." More than twice as many support church-state separation than those that think the two should be intertwined.

When it comes to religion’s role in government policy, most Americans think the two should be kept separate from one another. About two-thirds (65%) say religion should be kept separate from government policies, compared with 32% who say government policies should support religious values and beliefs. 

A narrow majority of Republicans and Republican leaners (54%) say religion should be kept separate from government policies. However, conservative Republicans are evenly split; 49% say government policies should support religious values and beliefs, while 48% think religion should be kept separate from policy. By roughly two-to-one (67% to 31%), moderate and liberal Republicans say religion should be kept separate from government policy. 

Among Democrats and Democratic leaners, 76% think religion should be kept separate from government policies. A wide 86% majority of liberal Democrats say this; a somewhat smaller majority of conservative and moderate Democrats (69%) take this view. 

White evangelical Protestants are one group where a narrow majority says government policies should support religion: 54% say this, while 43% say religion should be kept separate from policy. In comparison, majorities of both black Protestants (55%) and white mainline Protestants (70%) think religion should be separate from government policy.

In fact the only sub-group that supports the idea that government should support religion are white Evangelical protestants. And, coincidentally, members of this group voted overwhelmingly for the Trump-Pence 2016 ticket and the Trump administration has multiple members of this group in the Cabinet (Attorney General Jefferson Beauregard Sessions, III and Vice-President Mike Pence). What impact this will have on public policy is extremely worrying to godless people like yours truly.

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Jacinda Adern, 37-yo PM of New Zealand, is Agnostic

Jacinda Adern is set to become the next Prime Minister of New Zealand. She is 37 years old and a former Mormon. She says she left the church over its homophobic stances on LGBT equality and same-sex marriage recognition. That was the main reason why I was going to blog about her but then I saw these quotes:

“I have a real respect for people who have religion as a foundation in their lives. And I respect people who don’t.“I’m agnostic. I don’t spend a lot of time trying to figure it out.“I just think people should be free to have their personal beliefs and not be persecuted for it, whether they be atheist or staunch church members."

Clearly New Zealand politics is very different from American politics! It is unlikely that the not-yet-sworn-in leader of our country would say something. After all, atheists are the one group that a majority of poll respondents still feel should not become President.

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: More Americans Identify As "Spiritual" Than "Religious"

The Pew Research Center regular conducts polls about religious identity of the American population. They asked people to put themselves into four categories: "religious and spiritual," "neither religious nor spiritual," "religious but not spiritual" and "spiritual but not religious."

In the 5 years since they last conducted the poll in 2012 the number of people who said spiritual but not religious jumped from 19% to 27% and the number who said religious and spiritual dropped from 59% to 48%.

Sadly, the group I would have identified with, Neither religious not spiritual only marginally increased from 16% to 18%.

Regardless, the fact that more Americans as "spiritual" (75%) than as religious (54%) is a pretty big deal, and is the key takeaway of today's Godless Wednesday.

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Is This Cross A "Secular Monument"?

There is a federal lawsuit ongoing around the cross shown in the image at the top of this post. A U.S. District Court judge has ruled that this large christian cross in Bayview Park in Pensacola, Florida must be removed within 30 days.

The attorneys-general of 14 states have filed an amicus brief saying that this cross is a "secular monument." Here are some excerpts:

"The mere fact that these monuments consist of crosses and other religious symbols does not negate their secular purpose or their historical and cultural significance."  

and 

"Ultimately, if it were accepted by this Court, the district court’s reasoning would threaten countless monuments across the Circuit. As detailed in the City’s appendix, state and local parks, squares, and government buildings boast veterans’ memorials that contain religious imagery, including crosses, citations to scripture, and the like."

That is exactly the point! There are so many government buildings which include religious imagery that are claimed to have "historical" and "societal" significance when the religious message is clear to others. The question is who will the federal judiciary agree with?