I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
Been a proud member of none for some 18 years now.
37 years for me. Ever since I read Bertrand Russell.
One of the quotes in the article said the nones weren't targeted by advertising because of their "indifference". They aren't indifferent! Although they differ on their positive constructions they are as one in their passionate assertion that nobody ELSE is going to tell me how I have to believe.
Greetings, comrades! Everything is going according to the Plan.
I think I was born a "none." I mean, we went to church and all when I was a kid, but I don't think anyone in my family actually believed that stuff.
I hope to pass my "none"-ism on to my children one day.
Praise no one! Now I know what I am.
But I'm not spiritual, I'm just underweight.
Increase of 8% to 14% from 1990 to 2001? Hmmmm...well then it must be Clinton's "fault"!
I suppose I'm agnostic, but still appreciate my Catholic roots. I guess that's why I was insulted by that Margaret Cho piece that cut down the Pope. 
My time as an altar boy helped make me the Bright I am today.
Hmmm.. this is another example of the polarization going on. The amount of people becoming more religious is also on a precipitous rise.
there's no big rise in religion. a media myth.
The Belief-O-Maticpegs me as a Buddhist, even though I was raised fundie...see what all that free thinking will do for you?
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/
7...ory_7665_1.html
Say it loud! We're nones and we're proud!
Now if only the media and the government would realize what a growing and potentially powerful group this is and react appropriately.
We're just coming to grips with the reality that this group even exists.
Pretty amazing, but true. Somehow the godsters have propagated the idea that every decent person believes in the invisible guy in the sky. I suppose if you're able to pretend that the invisible guy in the sky exists, maybe it's not much more of a fantasy to pretend that no one who doesn't share your fantasy exists.
When I went to the local hospital (this in suburban Chicago, not the Bible Belt), the intake person filled out a form asking for my personal information. When she got to "religion," I said "atheist." She blanched, and when she gave me the completed form, I saw that she had typed in "none reported," refusing to let her fingers type the A-word. So I crossed out "none reported" and wrote in "atheist." Go atheists! Fuck you, God!
This is in line with what I've been reading for some time now. However, the "More are single (29 percent) than the adult population as a whole (20 percent)" part is highly suspect. Even in the 45-to-64 age group, the general population is at least 20% unmarried, and the rate of unmarrieds is substantially higher in all older and younger age groups. For adults (defined as 21 and up), it's at least 35%.
i prefer 'The Other'
I can't fathom how Patricia O'Connell Killen can be so naive while teaching at PLU. That school is religious in name only; from my interaction with students there I'd estimate half the student body are "nones." I guess those theology courses are pretty self selecting.
Woo Hoo!!! I'm proud to be a none. I had jury duty a couple of weeks ago, and was happy to fill in "agnostic" in the appropriate blank.
I'm a Buddhist follower of Richard Dawkins' and Daniel Dennetts' neo-Darwinian evolutionary biology. I believe nature is a vast amazing mystery that requires no embellishment. The need to add something on top of nature is a failure of imagination, and an insult to what we already are. Religious ideas, even my own, are as convincing to me as claims for the true existence of the easter bunny.
Maybe the term should be "N/A" -- though I do still like Dawkins' "Bright".
there's no big rise in religion. a media myth.
What the poster was saying was that the number of people who identify themselves as more religious is on the rise. Their numbers aren't increasing from those who are irreligious, but rather those who are moderately religious. We are becoming more religiously polarized, as the number of "nones" and "very religious" increase.
I'm a proud none . . . and someday the religious nuts will be the minority. Religion is based on an ancient lie!
Sister Bunny -- cool website! I'm a secular humanist, apparently: no surprise there. The funny thing is that Roman Catholic came in dead last even though I grew up in a Roman Catholic country, and have a great deal of affection for all the traditions that entails. Of course, in France, it's just a big excuse to eat, drink, and socialize.
We are becoming more religiously polarized, as the number of "nones" and "very religious" increase.
Constantine
----------
Very true. On an anecdotal level, I observe many people in their 30s-40s with children seem reluctant to continue the "God is BS" line, at least openly, and return to the church. Coupled with the meme within some churches that they are under attack, their brainwashing of the moderates intensifies.
For those of you who haven't been in a while, go to a service and just quietly observe. Bizzare. Remember, half of our country is there every weekend, and it's unimaginable that a president would be elected who is a nonbeliever.
"there's no big rise in religion. a media myth."
Precisely, Atrios!
Now try telling that toPravada where they're running noxious crap like THIS.
"We're just coming to grips with the reality that this group even exists."
Who is it who didn't believe this group existed?
A-atheists?
IDIC
Thanks to none other than Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson.
The hideous display those two put on, no doubt, has converted many.
2 more "nones" from the jewish and roman catholic column. why did they ask your relgion on the jury duty form? i wasn't asked when i served.
Wait a minute! I thought nones were catholic?
A good quote from Clifford Geertz (said in his case about anti-relativists in anthrolpology, but apropos here):
"Just because I don't believe in your god does not mean I believe in your devil."
We are becoming more religiously polarized, as the number of "nones" and "very religious" increase.
Constantine
----------
Very true. On an anecdotal level, I observe many people in their 30s-40s with children seem reluctant to continue the "God is BS" line, at least openly, and return to the church. Coupled with the meme within some churches that they are under attack, their brainwashing of the moderates intensifies.
For those of you who haven't been in a while, go to a service and just quietly observe. Bizzare. Remember, half of our country is there every weekend, and it's unimaginable that a president would be elected who is a nonbeliever.
Even more shocking-- I bet liberals tend to fit more in the "none" category. It just goes to show how smart us liberals are!
This is an outright assault on the very institution of religion. I call on our leaders to defend the sanctity of religion with a Constitutional amendment banning this subversive behavior.
"My time as an altar boy helped make me the Bright I am today.--melior"
Another bright reporting here, melior.
Notice I'm not saying that "I am bright," but rather I am A bright. Go to the website and read about this group in Sacramento, Calif.
http://www.the-brights.net/
We're catching up with "Old" Europe in that more and more people are shedding the shackles of organized religion.
Enjoy your family day, one and all.
"More religious" my ass. These fundy and mormon churches that are ballooning in size are the most shallow religions possible. Snake handlers and talkers in tongues are "more" religious, say what you will but those freaks believe. These newly found faiths are a mile wide and an inch deep though; Social clubs with ego stroking by the sky pilot. Go to one of these mega-churches, you'll not find a less mystical place on Earth.
Cool quiz, Sister Bunny, though I'm not sure of its accuracy. I scored as a Christian Scientist, and while I enjoy their newspaper, I've never felt any particular affinity to the religion. Oddly, the religion of my birth (Reform Judaism) and the one I have practiced the most (Mahayana Buddhism) were tied for eleventh place. I may have been a bad test subject though. I had to answer a lot of the questions N/A or None of the above.
To be honest, I wouldn't feel entirely comfortable answering the question, "What is your religion, if any?" with "None". I wonder if "None of your damn business" was an option.
none here too.
Born and raised Roman Catholic - Irish heritage, no choice in the matter, attended Mass every Sunday till my low teens, forced to attend church during my boarding schools years, but was never a "true" believer and as I'm sure the vast majority of children/teens would agree, I find the whole nine yards freaking boring to the max!
Soon thereafter considered myself agnostic, but later in life (and maybe because of that) became a pretty ardent Atheist.
I can understand completely the need for something bigger to grasp onto, but formalized religion is just one huge pile of hooey. In fact I view most people who claim to believe in the minutiae of the bible (or your other book of record for your religion) as kind of loony...
Shaw Kenawe, I guess there's still a lot of catching up to do.
Here's a comparison of religion in the U.S. and Europe
http://pewforum.org/events/index....php?
EventID=49
"I grew up in a Roman Catholic country, and have a great deal of affection for all the traditions that entails. Of course, in France, it's just a big excuse to eat, drink, and socialize. --Helen in MD"
This is true of Italian Catholics, too. All the big religious holidays were always about food (and sometimes fashion).
I remember Eastertime in my childhood. My mother kept me home from public school on Good Friday, and we went shopping for new shoes to wear on Easter Sunday.
My Irish Catholic friends, who had the day off from Catholic school, had to kneel in front of a statue of Jesus for three hours and pray, and then they had to go to the stations of the cross.
Whew! That was serious stuff, but, in our family, we were never compelled to do that. It was strictly voluntary. Religious holidays in our home were an excuse to cook for three days and eat for four.
I'm sure if you counted the "well, nominally X but I only go to mass/masjid/temple/whatever" once a year and celebrate the holidays as family events, the number would be even higher.
According to the Belief-o-meter I'm 100% Unitarian! Well, secular humanist, which I would use to describe myself, was at 97%.
The Belief-O-Matic
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/
7...ory_7665_1.html
Thanks, Sister Bunny for the link to the quiz. Absolutely fascinating. I would never have pegged myself the way it turned out!
Seriously -- any thinking person has to eventually realize that the ancient religions (Judeism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism etc)have about as much basis in reality as the religions of the ancient greeks and romans.
Born and raised none, I consider myself essentially Agnostic. I lack the strength of feeling to be an atheist, though that's been called into question at election day recently. And I have a hunch that if most people actually knew what the word Agnostic really meant (as oppose to being a synonym for atheist) then the number of people identifying themselves as such would jump to over 20%, maybe oven over 30.
I was cradle-born a Lutheran in 1952, and in those days you breathed Lutheran very early. It was not only religious, it was cultural. After Lutheran university, I became devout, was the only musician -- the organist choir director. My now ex and I were good Lutheran kids. But I divorced both him and religion after some sort of weird epiphany in about 1985. I've been a proud "none" since, and even managed to help my children to have some room to think (little cradle-born clones they were), and now they are happy pagan adults. As the character in "Agnes of God" says: "there are many, many people without your God living happy, fulfilled lives, Mother".
I'm betting the numbers of nones are higher than the study indicates.
I'm a happy speck in the ocean of the Cosmos.
Thanx 'Trios, especially this part...
" For the most part, it provides more problems than solutions..."
Amen
Bokanist. Nones are a granfaloon.
Could someone explain the "I'm not religious, but spiritual" thing? It just doesn't make sense to me, apart from people trying to find a way to say "Well, I believe in God/Yaweh/Allah/etc. but I don't want to be associated with Falwell and Co.".
" Whatever the reason, nones grew from 8 percent of the U.S. population in 1990 to more than 14 percent in 2001."
Hooray. By mid century we might be a majority.
Finally, some news that we can thank God for today.
Could someone explain the "I'm not religious, but spiritual" thing? It just doesn't make sense to me, apart from people trying to find a way to say "Well, I believe in God/Yaweh/Allah/etc. but I don't want to be associated with Falwell and Co.".
That is but one possibility. However, there are many others. New ageism(literary license) and/or a general 'feeling'- entirely subjective of course - that there is something of an as yet discovered nature going on, that doesn't happen to pigeonhole into an as yet decribed 'ism.'
Me, I never recall having any manner of extra-natural beliefs.
Peace,
Otto
"I'm not religious, but spiritual"
That one is easy - being spiritually awed by the mysteries and the grandness of it all, but without a claim to answers and/or beliefs.
As for the "Brights" - I read that op-ed by Dawkins and identified, but I think it's a bad name. It's not going to catch on. Anyone who does not identify is a "Non-Bright"? That Label not very conducive to being accepted by true believers. It's just going to antagonize them even more.
Additional: It has always bothered me that atheism/agnosticism are called such. Non-belief in other phenomena rarely have rarely warranted special mention.
I'm not entirely sold on the idea of 'Brights' because of this. If this particular meme gains widespred adoption, I suppose it would warrant consideration..but I am opposed to labeling.
Could someone explain the "I'm not religious, but spiritual" thing?
I would guess it means they avoid doctrine and institution in their spiritual search. This is probably a very common position ( maybe they should organize )
Now that the "Brights" movement has crashed and burned can I just call myself a "None?"
Or would that offend Catholics?
does this mean we're not going to Hell in a handbasket?
Damn, I finally belong someplace.
does this mean we are entitled to have The Affirmations of Secular Humanism posted (or carved into 2 tons of granite) publicly in courthouses, schools, and government buildings?
My Irish Catholic friends, who had the day off from Catholic school, had to kneel in front of a statue of Jesus for three hours and pray, and then they had to go to the stations of the cross.
Shaw Kenawe
Ooooff. I think this must be the American brand of "Irish" Catholic. Back home, we certainly don't go in for that kind of thing.
Two things are happening: the U.S. is gradually becoming more like Europe, where "none" has long been a big category at the same time that many people are claiming to be more religious. One tip off to the reality of the situation is the difference between the percentage of people who say they go to church and church attendence as estimated from counts of cars in church parking lots. Religion was once a template for day to day living. For lot of Americans, religious faith has become an inconsequential ideological reflex. In most cases, professed belief in God and support for "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is a sort of cultural loyalty test, rather as sacrificing to the Emperor once was in the Roman Empire.
A fair percentage of "nones" might be wiccans/pagans/etc. Since you can lose your job, lose your kids and/or be subjected to a lot of abuse for being one (especially in the Bible Belt) a lot of adherents keep it to themselves.
Yep. Don't believe in god myself.
There is no god. There is only the great mystery.
"Keep your religion at home" - MalcolmX
Hmm, this thread scares the trolls.
Jim H - US more like Europe? Gradually, yes but not happening soon enough for me. We seem doomed to repeat the same mistakes the Europeans made as regards empire, war, and what happens to a society when there exists a great chasm between the few rich and many who are kept poor for the benefit of the moneyed class.
I would be a none! I'm rather irreverantly atheist('weak' atheist, for those who follow these things)and proud of it. And I'm glad to hear that the number of people willing to identify (or non-identify) as non-religious is on the upswing.
That said, I'd like to pop in a word or two of support for those who are religious, and are probably feeling a bit uncomfortable in this thread. I've explained it in this way to my friends: "Just because I think your religion is a bit silly doesn't mean I think you are silly. I believe in a number of silly things myself, just not that one."
"We're just coming to grips with the reality that this group even exists."
just wondering, are they gripping with both hands or are they still trying to shove their fantasies down my throat with the other hand?
I can't talk for all of Europe, but France is not that atheist, really. The big difference is that here, religion is completely private, and irrelevant in argumenting. Secularism is the key. nobody frowns , or swoon, on religion, and we atheists use churches for weddings and funerals, because it's pretty. It's just no big deal.
Amazing - the "Belief-o-Matic" pegged me as 100% "liberal Quaker",which is exactly what I consider myself, and 98% neo-pagan. Hmm.
A thought-provoking test; thanks to Sister Bunny for the link.
I'm an atheist, but I'm sure as shootin' ain't no "bright". Gaaah, could they have come up with a WORSE name than that?
I'm also fortunate to live in the least religious state in the nation according to the ARIS study (Washington) though I'm in the un-hip fundy-infested eastern side of the Cascades... it makes life a little more challenging.
I'm deep in the Midwest. So far I've turned away Baptists, Mormons and Jehovah's Witness from the door. I'm thinking of putting up a "no soliciting" sign.
Get thee to a none-ery! I can't believe no one tried that yet.
"None" doesn't work for me. I'm more an "everything." This poem from a friend has always said it well:
CREDO
We believe in the one message
like a fever chill
in each mushroom, inside
the chanterelle, the morel,
the rose coral and shaggy mane.
We believe the movement of a lake trout
takes on the sanctity of number
as the osprey dives. We believe the towhee.
We believe alpine snow water, when it teases the crags
and outcrops like clear giggling crystal,
is memorizing sunlight to help oysters grow.
We believe in synchronicity. We believe when a poem is conceived
the beloved knows. We believe Jupiter touches us with luck
as we live and live again, and that Jesus knew.
We believe sod holds. We believe there are
in each of us particles that once
were stars, that matter is thought,
and that this belief is the way
of breathing in.
--James Bertolino
yeah-- it is weird the trolls aren't touching this thread. Or maybe the Eschaton trolls are atheists too!
whoever gave that link http://pewforum.org/events/index....php?
EventID=49, thanks.
it's fascinating, and incredibly accurate.
though probably, the trolls are just scared by this topic, since I don't see anonymous or Philly G around.
I think there is a huge gap between the answer people give to a survey on religon and the number of butts in the pews on Sunday morning. Many people say "I'm a ____" when asked their religous affiliation, because that's what their parents told them, and maybe they showed up for church on Easter. I know a lot more about catholocism and protestant doctrines and have probably been to a wider variety of churches than most of these people and I fall into the "none" classification. I guess my point is that Bush's code words and kowtowing to the religous reich may not have quite the effect that some think when referring to a majority of americans having religous beliefs.
That test is sure interesting, although I'm not sure I would agree with it. I scored 100% Unitarian Universalist, but I think you'd have to kill me before you got me into a Unitarian congregation. (I knew this girl in high school who was a Unitarian, and I thought she was pretty creepy. Her coming back from an extended stay in California as a shiny-eyed Christian fundie who carried a Bible with her at all times did not increase my opinion of her, either.)
Oddly enough, I identify quite strongly with many of the tenets of Reconstructionist Judaism, particularly the "interpersonal" rules (ie. those that apply between humans, and not between humans and God), even though my family background is CofE, Presbyterian, and United Church of Canada.
I am still a "none," which is my usual answer when asked about my religion in general. I usually say "none" or "I don't have one," because it's somehow a more acceptable answer (even here in Canada) than saying "atheist" or "a
excuse me, "agnostic." I also despise the term "secular humanism," because to me it smells of W. Brevard Hand, and I think it's originally a wingnut fabrication. Anybody care to dredge me up an etymology? Who coined the term originally?
Damn 1000 character limit!
One day I'm sure all the current monotheisms will be viewed with the same bemused curiosity as the Greek or Roman or whatever pantheon. Is there anyone around actually worshipping any of those gods these days (apart from astrologers, although I don't think even they "worship" Mercury, Venus & co, do they?)
Interrobang - UU does have one thing in its favor at least - Tim Berners-Lee, the originator of www http://www.w3.org/People/Berners...rs-Lee/UU.html:
"UUists are people who are concerned about all the things which your favorite religion is concerned about, but allow or even require their belief to be compatible with reason. They are hugely tolerant and decidedly liberal. ... the peer respect is very similar to that of the Internet Engineering Task Force. Both are communities which I really appreciate."
The Big Question: when will we ever get a major politician who will admit that they are not religious? Is it possible?
It took me a long time to deprogram 12 years of Catholic education.
When I was finally clear and worked through agnoticism to confirmed atheism it was the greatest feeling. I felt whole for the first time.
Beyond Good and Evil. Taking responsibility for my own actions and morality. Not saying "God told me to bomb those people." Every second precious because there are no virgins or promises of an afterlife.
And sleeping in on Sundays. It was really telling when I finally noticed that preachers don't allow questions during their sermons.
Faith = no thinking = no questions.
A hardcore none would take all the paper money out of thier billfold and where it says 'In God We Trust' cross out 'God' and write in 'None'.
"The Big Question: when will we ever get a major politician who will admit that they are not religious? Is it possible?--Alex"
In this regard, New Zealand is waaaaaaaaaaaaay ahead of us. Their prime minister is a WOMAN and and ATHEIST!
I would like to be a member of the Church of John Coltrane, but I'll settle for Miles. -|||-
Isn't "Bright" the new positive in word for Atheists and Agnostics?
You definitely are brighter for not falling for the mythological tribal mumbo jumbo.
New Zealand has been way ahead of all of us for ages - first place to give women the vote, as well...
Is not one of the reasons that religion is still more popular in the USA than here in Europe the tax issues?
Can't anybody just set up a religion there and get tax free income?
Do Fallwell and Robertson pay any taxes on the millions they pull in?
There have been some USA well funded attempts to push the born again movement here. But so far it has been limited in it's succsess. Trouble they find, is that the 18 -30 age group just like going out drinking most nights.
We also have the advantage of a lot more history than you. We spent over a thousand years fighting each other over religion. Actually, we were quite pleased when the Pilgrim farther's left our lands to set up business, ( sorry, I mean set up a pure religion) in your country.
A hardcore none would take all the paper money out of thier billfold and where it says 'In God We Trust' cross out 'God' and write in 'None'.
Pinky Tinkleton | 11.27.03 - 4:47 pm | #
that's a great idea... although I would simply cross out the whole sentence, because faith or not, it shouldn't be expressed there.
Why don't we start a trend?
sky, I love that poem!! And I'll sure check out your weblog. Thanks.
I would like to be a member of the Church of John Coltrane, but I'll settle for Miles. -|||-
BudMan
Oh, go for Coltrane, Miles was obnoxious. If Gil Evans hadn't worked with him he'd have been a lot less noticed. Those arrangements did an awful lot for him. I hate his fusion stuff. I'd go for Mary Lou Williams, so under rated, but she was a Catholic.
I'm a believer who is encouraged by the number of nones. A lot of the nones I've known were much more honest and much more spiritual than the believers I've known.
Maybe the nones should organize themselves into orders, The Nones of Perpetual Thinking, perhaps.
Right now, there's a kid in Nebraska who thinks of me as a prophet. Perhaps some day there will be a Holy Church of the Goat Boy? Shit, I hope not.
And I hit 100 percent on the Unitarian thing. Big surprise, any one who's listened to my stuff could have told you that.
Fuck, I wish I was still alive. The worse things get, the more people like me are created. I'd do my routine outside of the White House with a megaphone.
One of the reasons that I've seen as partly explaining the difference between Europeans and Americans regarding religions is that the Europeans have actually remembered theocracies in action and aren't in a hurry to repeat the experience any time soon.
I'm a none by way of Discordianism and assorted topics.
The trolls are staying away 'cause most of the hardcore GOP ideologues are atheists, too. Frankly, you just can't reconcile hardcore GOP ideology with Christianity. They are diametrically opposed.
"I also despise the term "secular humanism," because to me it smells of W. Brevard Hand, and I think it's originally a wingnut fabrication."
I'm a sexual humorist and I have no idea where I came from but I don't want to go back.
The Belief-o-matic pegs me as a Liberal Humanist Christian. Works for me.
I've been a "none" for 30 years. Happily, the contemptuous looks from various form-fillers have dropped to 'none' since then, too.
Here in the Bible belt, though, I still get solicited to convert almost as much as I get spam offers to enlarge my non-existent penis. Maybe they both work on commission.
I never realized when they stamped "none" on my dogtags I was joining a "group". Oh well, the dues are reasonable and you can't beat the meeting scheduling.
About Europe, I heard that many years ago Benny Hind was doing a "show", I think in Frankfurt, and when he had people up on stage to "heal" them he smacked some woman, knocked her over backwards and she ended up in the hospital. Supposedly the Polizei are still looking for him for assault. Anyway, he does shows in England and the Netherlands, but hasn't been seen in Germany since.
Atrios,
hooray to that as well!
There's no group of Americans so discriminated against as the "Nones"
When Latino Americans reached 12%, the Repubs hired Ricky Martin to sing at their little Presidential picknic.
I wonder how many more of we Nones there has to be before they stop all this Fundamentalist nonsense and start courting our votes?
"Nones," like sub-Christian "faiths" or self-described "homosexuals," are just faking it. Prayerful, unrelenting compassionate conservatism can cure you. What am I saying? After George the Second becomes by the grace of the Supreme court President in 2004, and Roy Moore is granted Viceroyalty of the Middle-West Third, you will be healed!
"Frankly, you just can't reconcile hardcore GOP ideology with Christianity. They are diametrically opposed."
Precisely, Scooter, and thanks for pointing it out!
I can't get my mind around the concept of identifying as a "Bright"--why organize around something we're NOT? Yes, fellowship is nice, but who needs to relate it to a certain belief or lack thereof?
I once wrote a letter to the local paper in protest of an article about how our community was becoming more religious, which implied that we were also becoming better people. The following week, a guy called me up and tried to recruit me into an Atheist group! Not exactly what I was going for...
For the record, Belief-O-Matic calls me a Universal Unitarian, followed by Theravada Buddhism, Liberal Quaker, and Secular Humanism... "Nontheist" is 12th on the list. Go figure.
Hmm it said a Mainline Protestant Liberal Christian.
Actually, I'm an Evengelical Protestant Liberal Christian.
That's right... Evangelical AND LIBERAL blow all your minds :D
Been a "none" all my life. Been officially an atheist since my father told me that, since I casually mentioned I didn't believe in Jehovah or any other fictitious spirit, I was an atheist (I was 6, I didn't know they had words for that kind of stuff).
Never could figure out what the big deal was, but I've never experienced any religious persecution.
Hi everyone, my name's Niall and I'm an atheist...
I'm not a 'bright', and I think I'm smarter than the gobshite who decided that calling atheists 'brights' would somehow be a win.
Fuckwit.
Favourite T shirt:
"Dear God, please save us from all those who believe in you"
If only we had a decent science education as an integral part of our publicly funded basic education....
Then these numbers would grow even more
One of the many reasons the right-wing fears us so.
I am who am.
Quick, someone tell Nicky Kristof we got another Great Awakening for him here!
Then we can get an NYT op-ed, and the power elite will start publicly referring to themselves as "nones" in order to generate for themselves a positive response from us "nones". We's got ourselves into a vo-ting block, yessirree!
I wasn't born a "none," but was converted to one by Christian prosletyzing.
Yeah, I was probably born a none then my parents found the Worldwide Church of God. We attended that for many years. My sister went to their college for a couple years, but didn't graduate from it. When she came back to local college, she had to start over because they are nonaccredited(?) They really brainwash the sheep. If you aren't from their church, you are a piece of crap. My parents finally got out of the church and save the tithe money for a year and bought a van with it. They called it "Herbert's Van". For Herbert W Armstrong - the founder of the church. I think my parents saw the light when one of the parishioners died and the church took a collection to buy flowers. The church didn't even give money to the family to help them over the bad times. My parents were quite perturbed that those people who paid their tithes at the various tithing times - they had special events like the feast of tabernacles where the parish paid out their yearly % instead of collec
DANGER DANGER DANGER!
Okay, first let me say that my credentials as a godless heathen liberal whatever are bona fide; check my website if you don't believe me. I am not a troll. BUT:
It is really dangerous to greet the news of a downtick in American religiosity with glee, smugness, or anything else that makes us look to people who ARE religious like Somalians dancing around a downed Blackhawk. It's politically suicidal, and it's the one aspect of the culture wars we will not, will not, will not win.
I've been proselytized, preached at, and Watchtower-ed within an inch of my life. By a delightful quirk of fate, Fred Phelps has visited each of the last three places I lived while I was there. We all know the joy of being threatened with damnation, but lemme tell you, smug, evangelical atheists: they are you, and you are them, and at least the Jehovah's Witnesses are polite. Observe your local Mormon: does she try to convert you by telling you that you're stupid, gul
gullible, and the product of an under-Mormonized school system? No, and that's why she occasionally succeeds.
Privately, we can be as certain as we like that the masses are gorging themselves on opium. But if we cannot accept the idea that the world is always going to be populated by people who follow a god or three, then we will get crucified by them. And, since we're atheists, that will pretty much be the end of the story.
If you value your freedom FROM religion, go smile at a Lutheran today. Pretend to be interested in the Advent calendar his daughter made at Sunday School. Then get him registered Democratic! {Sorry to be so verbose!}
DAMN!! I typed and typed then hit the button... now I forgot the rest of it... oh well.....
Matt, I have to agree with you about the Mormons I know. We don't live in Utah, but one of the guys in my carpool is Mormon, my neighbor on one side is Mormon and I used to have neighbors on the other side that were also Mormon. They all are really nice, thoughtful people. I realize that not all people of a faith are all the same, but my association with these people give me a very fond outlook on the Mormon faith.
Matt (hey, good name...)
I tend to agree, but with cavets. I'm agniostic, but I don't hold truck with the concept that "agnostic" is a way of saying "chickenshit atheist," as a friend of mine once put it. Way I look at it, there's no way one can truly define what is supposedly greater than existence itself, i.e. God/Allah/Supreme Being/Bob/etc. There might be - even if it's Plato's original source - and there might not be. I don't know, and neither does anyone else.
What I do know, however, is that all man-made religions are just that: man made. No divine inspiration and, frankly, very little difference in their worth. Me, I see each and every one as complete, utter horsefeathers, designed mainly to keep the rabble in line, either through threats or pie-in-the-sky promises.
That all being said, if someone wants to believe, they're more than welcome to pray their empty little heads off so long as they don't use public money for their fairy tales. I've got no truck
[con't...damn Haloscan limits]
That all being said, if someone wants to believe, they're more than welcome to pray their empty little heads off so long as they don't use public money for their fairy tales. I've got no truck with religion, and while I respect people and their needs to believe, I don't respect those beliefs.
I look at the cosmos with a never-ending wonder. The mysteries of life are such that it stuns one into constant amazement and, if one has proper grasp of one's facilities, a lifelong journey of discovery. I look forward to the day when religions all go the way of Odin, Zeus and Osiris, and humanity instead embraces the wonders of existence unfettered with dogma.
Then again, that's just me.
Even though I am not religious enough to go to church, I think the Native American Indians had the right idea about God. I think that God is the world around us, which includes the people, animals, natural resourse, etc.
My sociology teacher pointed out that society needs religion to keep the people all on the save wavelength. In this way, they do not question, but follow in the footsteps of their leader.
Funny how after 911 everyone that thinks of themselves as PATRIOT found religion. "Thank God, Thank Jesus, Bless us God, and help us kill those heathen Iraqis. God bless America."
I escaped from Sevvy Land (SDA Church)around the age of 17. It was the inconsistencies that eventually got me.
There are really only two kinds of Christianity - that with a healthy obsession with the injustice in the world around it, and that with an unhealthy obsession with people's bedrooms and what goes on in them...
Unfortunately, the US seems to be in the grip of the second.
It's just like someone upthread put it - the trolls aren't here because thet're atheists - capitalism and Chrsitianity are mutually incompatible.
Unless you live in the Bible Belt, that is.
Until someone (anyone?) manages to unhook Jesus from the stockmarket (anyone wanna kick out the moneychangers?) Christianity will stagger aimlessly further and further away from the original message.
It used to be the religion of subversion and political resistance, but ever since the Milvian bridge it's been on the same side as Caesar.
Literally.
Wouldn't being a none make you Catholic ? Then again, I think there are Buddhist nones too.
If you have never visited the Robert Green Ingersoll homepage, go here:
http://www.secularhumanism.org/i....org/ingersoll/
Ingersoll was a celebrated freethinker, orator and supporter of woman's and worker's rights in the USA during the second half of the 19th century.
And mske sure you don't miss the "Complete Works of Ingersoll" section. Great reads. Ingersoll was a truly remarkable American patriot.
Somehow that quiz thingy has stuck on "unitarian universalist" for me. I answered about as atheistic as possible, but nontheist and secular humanist come up second and fifth. Flawed.
How did "we" lose so many Christians? How did the number of people in the U.S. who do not believe or practice a religion grow from 8 percent in 1990 to 14 percent in 2001? How, you ask?
It's simple. Look who was President then.
It's all Clinton's fault.
Later,
Can any of the thoughtful people here care to clarify the difference between atheists and agnostics? Is it simply:
Atheists believe there is no (G)od. Agnostics don't know either way.
"The only excuse for God is that he does not exist"
Forgot where that quote comes from...
as a introverted, anti-social, anti-ritual, non-church going liberal synod lutheran, i say more power to the nones.
Whatever the reason, nones grew from 8 percent of the U.S. population in 1990 to more than 14 percent in 2001.
Isn't it obvious? It's all Bill Clinton's fault.
Let's see- baptized as Lutheran, conformed Presbyterian (the girls in the youth group were prettier), did beaucoup meditation time in a Zen monastary and learned Taosim from the abbot. All this and I became a Born Again Heathen. (I'll let you figure out the acronym) It seems like I.m in good company.
Liberal Evangelical huh? Both elitist and convinced of rightness. Go join the other side please.
There are two kinds of atheist: those who don't believe in anything supernatural, and those who don't believe in a deity. 'None' doesn't really cover either category, though it does disdain religion itself.
As for the first kind of atheist, as far as 'supernatural' goes, it's really a sort of faith in physics. But physics doesn't deal with entities, so it doesn't gather such evidences as there are aplenty in the company of real spiritual figures, which the human race produces in quantity. The real downside of 'monotheistic' religions is that they strongly trend towards denying any other appearance of spiritual power, when they aren't slaughtering people for 'false' views, and taking their land.
I'm about to the point where I'm calling myself "post", as in "post-Christian." Thing is, I still like Jesus, just not the organization. It didn't help, I'm sure, that I lived in Utah for several years and got to experience overwhelming dominance by one religious organization firsthand. Utah made me into a rabid "tax the churches" person.
An agnostic believes that it is not possible to know whether God exists or not, that human knowledge is insufficient to make a determination one way or the other.
However, an agnostic is without a belief in God, so one could make the argument that agnostics are indeed atheists. That is, they are without (a) belief in God (theist).
The original definition of agnosticism was something like this (first definition at dictionary.com):
"The doctrine that certainty about first principles or absolute truth is unattainable and that only perceptual phenomena are objects of exact knowledge."
Namely, that the things we can perceive are the things to which our knowledge (in terms of any certainty) is limited.
We can perceive the succession of fauna in the fossil record, meaning we can exclude a literalistic interpretation of Christian/Jewish/Islamic texts on numerous fronts.
This would strongly suggest to most fundy literalists that the document is incorrect(whole hog), which is why literalists fear education.
We can perceive a large portion of the 'action' in the physical world, but we cannot know what we cannot perceive in any indirect way.
Therefore says the classical agnostic, any story about the imperceptible, be it absurd or plausible, is as good as another because you can never Really Kno
Screw it, I'm not going to rewrite that additional part. Happy thanksgiving.
None for 7 years.
jdancingkid, re: agnosticism vs. athiesm, it is possible to seperate between the two. Maybe categories would be better:
Those who don't know if there's a God but believe that there is a higher power than them in the universe;
those who don't know about either God or higher powers;
and those who don't believe in any higher power, including God.
I'm the second category, myself. Don't know, no way to find out, not going to make me happier to embrace that which I can't prove, so why bother?
Keep looking for the truth, all!
"Maybe three categories" is what I meant. I could type once. Really.
I don't belive that Jesus died for my sins.
There, I said it.
Now I'm officially un-american according to the GOP.
I'm a none who goes to church every week - I'm a paid singer for a Congregational Church choir. I was raised Irish Catholic (where religious events were about drinking, not food), and never really bought the whole thing.
The church where I sing is quite liberal. The minister has 2 bumperstickers on her car: Peace is Patriotic and Dissent is Patriotic.
A few people have expressed the belief that Agnosticism is a subset of Atheism. I don't believe that's true. An Agnostic can hold that God probably exists. The central tenet of Agnosticism is that the question is (at least presently) undecideable. An Atheist does not permit the slightest chance that God exists.
Of course, that doesn't mean the two are wholly independent. It's clear that they intersect where an Agnostic does not believe in God. It should also be mentioned that, at a certain point, every Atheist is an Agnostic. There are limitations to knowledge. For any possible answer, X, attempting to prove that God does not exist, a devil's advocate may reply with, "But what if God only makes it look like X?" Since this is boundless, at a certain point the Atheist must apply Occam's Razor and declare that he cannot know this, or anything, with 100% certainty, but he finds it so absurd as to be very likely false.
I am not sure when I became a "none"; although I suspect that my "none" status had something to do with being forced to go to Mass hung-over, and on occassion still drunk, during my late teens. Parents didn't mind that I was out drinking all night, they acknowledged there is little else to do in rural America, still they did insist that I attend Mass every Sunday. A small price to pay I suppose and I understood their position - it hard to explain to the other parishiners why your 16 year old has stopped attending church (much easier to explain why your son was busted for under age consumption of alcohol).
Actually, none of this has anything to do with being a none, but thanks for letting me share.
For God's sake, will you nones get breeding? I'd like to see Republicans pandering to the faithless for a change.
Wait, dirk. Ain't all them non-religious types HOM-UH-SEX-U'L? How they goin' to get any breedin' done?
They's going to keep doing it the same ol'-fashined way, I'se sure...teaching good God-fearin' kids the ways of the DEVIL!
(and more seriously, I don't know if this news really makes me happy or not. I mean, it's good for others to believe something similar to what I believe. But I'm sure that this isn't the fundamentalists who are turning their backs on the Lord, but those who are fairly moderate. Which just means that the ratio of wackos to normal people in religion is just going to get higher. Scary concept, that...)
Oh, and as for fun youth religion stories:
My father was raised Catholic. My mother was raised Southern Baptist. Now, add the phrase "shotgun wedding" to the mix...you can see why my views on religion aren't status quo.
I've studied religion a lot. And I can see how they would help people. But I just don't have that faith, I guess. Too much skeptic in me. Can't tell if that's a good quality or not, sometimes...a little blind faith would make parts of life a lot easier to bear, I'm sure.
Yes to ^up there about the (no) tax thing being close to the religion thing:
"A slogan of the American Revolution which was so distressing to the emissaries of the king that it was found in correspondence sent back to England was the line, "We have no king but Jesus." Tax collectors came, asking for that which belonged to the king, and colonists frequently said, "We have no king but Jesus."
From the great calico cat lover himself, Ashcroft (see http://abcnews.go.com/sections/p...ipt010112.html)
.
I don't believe Jesus died for my sins, either. But I think quite a few people have died for W's sins.
A few years ago I found a copy of "Free Inquiry" on a PATH train here in New Jersey. In it, Richard Dawkins said that it was unfair to tag people with the label "atheist". He said, I don't believe in faeries, either, but there's no word for that. Isn't the onus on those who believe to demonstrate the existence of a thing before they label those who don't believe?
When pressed, he said he is a "scientific rationalist", if my memory serves. More of that, please.
[Dawkins is the Uber-Evolutionist who wrote "The Selfish Gene" and "The Blind Watchmaker", among others.]
Atheists are not "nones." There's a big difference between "I dunno" and "I know there's no God."
The real number is probably much higher. It requries courage in our society to admit to being non-religious.
After reading David Limbaugh/Alan Keyes/Ann Coulter's writings about how there was no Constitutional authority for "the separation of church and state" because the Constitution allowed the right to have an official religion to the states, I assigned each state a religion (the most populous state, CA, got the religion cited most frequently on survery, Christianity, and so on down the list--until I ran out of religions, and assigned a few states some of the other demographics from the survey.
I posted it on my blog, and people came up with many suggestions, such as the atheists, agnostics, and nones wanting their own power corridor; they were assigned the Pacific North West.
Anyway, here's the link to the final iteration of the Official State Religion List: you have until Jan. to either convert or to move to a state that suits your beliefs.
http://blogs.salon.com/0002874/
s...ligionList.html
"the real number is probably much higher" - WVMCL
There's no doubt in my mind. Saying you're a Chistian in the U.S. is just following the path of least resistance. Many if not most do it for business and social reasons - there's no harm in saying you are, but potiental harm in saying you're not (no harm in saying you are, that is, unless hypocrisy bothers you, which lets out most business and socialite types).
Most folks I know who are proclaimed Christians are actually scientific materialists at heart. They're just scared of the fundamentalist nutballs.
Dave, since you brought up Ashcroft, let me tell you a tale about Ashcroft which only showed up in my local newspaper and not nationally.
About a year-and-a-half ago, unannounced, Ashcroft flew into my hometown in the Florida panhandle, went to a particular nutball church which even the Baptists shake their heads over, sat for the service, then hopped his plane (at our expense, of course) and quietly left. The newspaper got wind of it, otherwise no one would have known. That was the day I got scared of the irrationality of him and his ilk.
The reason I answer none on questionaires is because my faith or lack of it is nobody's f*uckin' business but my own, especially not the government's. I do admit to having dropped out of organized religion in disgust after years of seeing churchs in competition with each other as to who could waste more money building bigger and bigger and fancier and fancier structures rather than spending that money for the poor and unfortunate, a comple
I recently saw a bumper sticker:
"Militant Agnostic--I don't know and you don't either!"
I sometimes think of myself as an Apathetic, someone who feels that the concept of God is irrelevant, But I realize that I find religion facinating. I'm culturally Jewish, sympathetic to Reconstructionism, but find many of the humanistic ideas of Buddhism attractive (as expressed in the books by the Dalai Lama).
Having lived through the era of prayer and Bible reading in the public schools, I find forced religious incursions into public life extremely irritating. I can hardly listen to classical music radio stations from the day after Thanksgiving until the after New Years because of the constant Christmas music.
Mark - on the nose!
"Can any of the thoughtful people here care to clarify the difference between atheists and agnostics? Is it simply:
Atheists believe there is no (G)od. Agnostics don't know either way."
Atheists believe there is no God but they hate Him anyway.
Agnostics don't know if there's a God but they're sure not going to risk offending Him if there is.
Seriously, the problem with all this is that the term "God" when mentioned in this context invariably means some version of the Judeo-Christian Big Kahuna. I have no problem in clearly rejecting any belief in this primitive entity but can't claim to know enough to be sure that there is not some other kind of teleological factor at work in the universe. Thus my agnosticism, secularism or "Bright"ism doesn't mean that I'm unsure about the non-existence of the Judeo-Christian God, only that we don't know enough about the way the universe works to be certain that some more sophisticated version of the divine isn't present in it.
Atheists are not "nones." There's a big difference between "I dunno" and "I know there's no God."
The question asked was "What is your religion if any?"
Unless you are making the absurd claim that atheism is a religion then atheists certainly fall under the "none" catagory.
Let's clear up some confusion here. The discussion I have seen in this thread goes along with what I know are common misconceptions about what certain words actually mean. This is especially true when it comes to what it means to be an atheist.
To be an atheist only requires a negative response to the question "Do you BELIEVE in a god or gods?". That's it. Nothing more. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in god and nothing more. SOME atheists may go further and make the statement that there is absolutely no god but they are actually in the minority in the atheist community. Most atheists simple lack belief in any of the thousands of gods that have been put forth by mankind up
previous message got cut. here's the rest:
Most atheists simple lack belief in any of the thousands of gods that have been put forth by mankind up to this point.
Also, atheism/theism and agnosticism deal with two very different things. The choice isn't atheist, theist OR agnosticism. Atheism/theism deals with what you BELIEVE and agnosticsm/gnosticism deals with what you KNOW. It is quite possible (in fact it is quite PROBABLE) to both an agnostic and a theist or atheist. Some theists claim absolute knowledge of the existence of god and some atheists claim absolute knowledge that god cannot exist. Both are in the minority of their respective beleive systems. Much more common is the agnostic atheist or the agnostic theist. These folks (myself included) do not think it is possible to prove the existence or non-existence of some sort of being that might be called a god but they beleive or don't beleive based on what they perceive to be the truth.
It should be noted tha
When I was a tot in England we were with the C of E, but we never went to church.
Some neighbors insisted that my parents take me so they offered to escort us. In church, they split up the children and had two doors - one for the 'good' children and one for the 'bad' children that didn't go to church regularly.
I went in the 'bad' door and my parents weren't allowed to accompany me. I came out crying and screaming about hell and the devil.
A week later I jumped off a little bridge into a creek because I was "trying to get to heaven."
My mother never forced religion on me again.
I've been a 'none' ever since.
By the way... I know it's "believe" but I have this weird typing glitch that pops up on that word a lot. I should really proofread more.
Kafka
On the alt.atheism newsgroup, where (for some odd reason!) a lot of net atheists hang out, the following classification was developed:
"Strong" atheist: has a positive belief that there is no God dammit. And yes, I actually met an evangelical atheist of this stripe there, suggesting evangelism has more to do with the human desire to make everyone follow your 'truth' than about religion itself.
"Weak" atheist: has no particular "belief" in the positive or the negative senses. (Often overlaps with "apathetics".) Doesn't believe there is a god; doesn't believe there isn't a god. Doesn't think the necessary proof has been provided for the premise "God exists", and therefore holds the null hypothesis of "no God" for simplicity. That sort of thing.
I wonder how many more of we Nones there has to be before they stop all this Fundamentalist nonsense and start courting our votes?
No chance. By the mere fact that we don't attend church and conform to the pseudo-morality of Bible thumping hypocrites, we are considered un-American moral deviants. They'll no more court our votes than we would court the votes of the KKK or the Nazi party.
If someone already answered the question: "Why do they ask for religion on jury duty forms," forgive me - I scrolled through the posts, didn't read them all in detail.
The reason is that it helps both sides when it comes to picking a jury. It's all based on certain assumptions and stereotypes, but you have to have something to go on. Criminal defense lawyers are more likely to want women, minorities and non-fundies; prosecutors definitely don't want a lot of women, try to keep the minorities down to as few as possible, and will go for fundies. In civil cases, it all depends on the type of case it is. But that's the reason.
It isn't just the U.S. that is becoming more polarized, it's the whole planet, and it's disturbing. But it's good to know that some reality is leaking through all the noise made by the extremists. I agree with Atrios - it's a media myth that people are more religious. The "more religious," which in the U.S. means the "more Christian fundi
Oops - this new word limit takes getting used to -
con't: The more religious, which in the U.S. means "the more Christian fundie" are just so damned pushy and loud that they are drowning out the saner part of the population.
I wonder about the accuracy of the accounting. In the Navy I was asked of my affiliation for my dog tags. My response 'none' was translated to 'no preference' When I tried to explain the difference, I was told to shut up.
This poll may be one big misunderstanding.
Question 1: Do you think George W. Bush is a fine and handsome young fellow?
Question 2: Do you think Bill Clinton should have been impeached and removed for his relationship with Monica Lewinsky?
Question 3: Do you agree with the Catholic Church's position on condoms?
Question 4: Do you think Muslim fundamentalists are a threat to the Miss World pageant?
Question 5: What is your religious preference: Catholic, Protestant, Fundamentalist, Mormon, Jewish, Hindu, Muslim American, or none?
"I'm a nun, ma'am."
And the call center folks in Bangalore, mindful of the fame of Mother Teresa, draw their breath in awe and ask no more questions.
Old line from atheists to agnostics: are you agnostic about unicorns, too?
Everybody makes their best guess about these things. If you aren't convinced there's a God, you're an atheist. Doesn't mean you're not willing to consider new evidence.
Dawkin's idea to destigmatize atheists by naming them "Brights" is a rare lapse by a smart man. Beyond sounding arrogant, it sounds a little...gay.
"Freethinker" has a great pedigree and associations. We don't need a better word.
hawsers, nones, and bunnies!!!!
(the shit has hit the fan)
J.T.
But, its the Christians who are being persecuted. Just ask Rush's brother.
Could someone explain the "I'm not religious, but spiritual" thing?
======
I would guess it means they avoid doctrine and institution in their spiritual search. This is probably a very common position ( maybe they should organize)
Sometimes people who would identify with this statement come across Neopaganism and find their spiritual home; however:
A fair percentage of "nones" might be wiccans/pagans/etc. Since you can lose your job, lose your kids and/or be subjected to a lot of abuse for being one (especially in the Bible Belt) a lot of adherents keep it to themselves.
As a former 'none' now Pagan, I have to agree with this. There is an entire group of good people practising a good faith who are forced to keep it hidden because it is still socially acceptable to be intolerant of nature-based, non-heirarchical religions.
Anyways, that being said, My question for the agnostics is, how do you know your agnostic?
I still get solicited to convert almost as much as I get spam offers to enlarge my non-existent penis.
For a while, I had a discreet plaque mounted by my doorbell which read, "This property protected by Spiritual Security. [[ vaguely satanic symbol ]] Evangelists will be arrested and prosecuted."
And then I took it down. Why spread more negativity? So maybe I evolved, a little.
The Belief-O-thingy suggests I'm Unitarian Universalist. Which is a bit creepy, since that was how I was raised.
Am now a Zen none.
The Church of John Coltrane-- exists, and it's in San Francisco.
My results were: Universalist Unitarian (win) Quaker (place) and Theravada Buddhist (show). I was raised a secular , Japanese-style Mahayana Buddhist but I consider myself to be a Reconstructionist Jew (the Deity is optional for Reconstructionists). My parents were definitely "nones," for very good reasons. My father's parents were Jewish and Catholic, and forced him to go to two sets of services/lessons, until he cried plague on both their houses of worship. Later he decided that Mother's Buddhism made more sense. Mother is a cast-iron atheist because her mother's not terribly bright cousin was officially divine until Mom was in fifth grade. How seriously can you take religion after that? In my house, we keep all the holidays we can get our paws on, if they involve food.
I agree with Kafka on the Agnostic/Atheist definitions, [it is also very boolean].
It is the Gnostics [Theist or Atheist] who are annoying. They KNOW, so you should accept their view.
Living a block from one of the larger SBC churches in the Florida Panhandle [they are on the local cable access channel] I can tell you that the number of people who actually show up in a pew every week is well below those who make that claim in polls.
Wednesday prayers are an interesting time to watch the parking lot. There are more cars than people, as two people drive up in separate cars, leave one of the cars in the lot, and go off together.
I wouldn't care, if these people would act like Christians instead of Nazis. If you go to services you almost never hear anything from the New Testament except Revelations. It's sad.
As a "none" who was raised Catholic (enter your own none-nun joke here), I have a theory that religion was devised by cave-parents as a necessary tool to keep their little cave-kids in check::
"Little Zog is running around crazy! We can't control him!"
"I know...we'll say that an all-powerful, omnipotent being is watching every move he makes away from us..."
"Say, that's crazy enough to work!"
Just my idea....
At least "Fundie Protestant", "Orthodox Jew", "Catholic" and "Islam" were all tied for dead last. How "Unitarian Universalist" got up there is beyond me, but everyone I know says they're really atheists who need a reason to get together and kick the can around.
The last time I was in a religious event was waaaaaaay back in Navy boot camp - it was a great hour's sound sleep.
Like the Dylan song says: "but to live outside the law/you must be honest."
TC
Not only the fact that the Brights haven?t been properly acknowledged, but also that they are continuously vilified: ?If you are not with us, you are against us!?
Where have I heard that before?
Unitarians are growing by 1% a year, at a time when other liberal denominations (Episcopalian, Presbyterian) are shrinking.
Someone once said that Unitarians believe in at most one god.
Maybe my answer, rather than being "None" would be "All".
I believe and can respect them all as long as they do not try to dictate policy outside of that select group. The problem with selecting any "one" is that most of those selections require you no longer believing in the others. This is where the "problems" with organized religions begin. (little problems like genocide, torture, etc.)
Once a religion becomes mutually exclusive with other religions it has become a pariah to all around it and absolutely counter to democracy in America. Maybe that also goes for "None". "None" cannot be perceived as just another religion (even if it becomes a majority) trying to dictate policy on the other "believers". We must truly be inclusive and respect all beliefs as long as it does not rear its ugly head in the creation of policy. This is what the Founders stood for and documented in the Constitution.
Maybe if I'm ever asked again on a form I will put down: -American
Wow: the Belief-O-Matic says I'm a Liberal Quaker; who'da thunk it?
I've have guessed Taoist, myself.
However, methinks there's not a lot of Liberal Quaker outfits here in Arkansas. Guess I'll stick with small-p pagan.
I use "unafflicted".
"Nones" is not to be confused with "nuns."
How about 'radical Agnosticism'? While I see no evidence of the existence of any supernatural Beings and do not believe any exist (convinced Atheist) I freely concede the possibility it/they could be concealed from our perception. It might even be possible that it/they speak to some humans/grant some people direct perception of its/their reality. To 'come as a thief in the night' so to speak.
It always puzzles me that the mere existence of so many religions each with their contingent of devout believers does not give more people pause. Were there a god desiring worship, would it not take care that its message be clearly and universally available to all? Why all the gamesmanship? That such a being might be considered benevolent seems laughable. It creates us to mislead/torment/destroy most of us? Such a contemptible being should be feared, of course, as should a shark sharing the same patch of ocean with you. (such grimness possibly due being raised Presbyterian)
door mail slot door mail slot door mail slot. toy slot machine for sale toy slot machine for sale toy slot machine for sale.
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
