Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

aliihsanasl · #1 by **aliihsanasl** » May 16, 2016 8:30 pm

An ongoing spate of recent studies - looking at various countries around the world - all show the same thing: religion is in decline. From Scandinavia to South America, and from Vancouver to Seoul, the world is experiencing an unprecedented wave of secularization. Indeed, as a recent National Geographic report confirms, the world’s newest religion is: No Religion.

ScholasticSpastic · #2 by **ScholasticSpastic** » May 16, 2016 9:18 pm

Poorly chosen terms. Secularism and religion are not exclusive. Secularism was started by Christians to limit the interference of the State in their churches. It's a good idea, and I'm behind it, and I think the concept is important enough that we shouldn't water down its meaning with other, unrelated issues. Secularism =/= atheism.

Darwinsbulldog · #3 by **Darwinsbulldog** » May 17, 2016 3:30 am

ScholasticSpastic wrote:Poorly chosen terms. Secularism and religion are not exclusive. Secularism was started by Christians to limit the interference of the State in their churches. It's a good idea, and I'm behind it, and I think the concept is important enough that we shouldn't water down its meaning with other, unrelated issues. Secularism =/= atheism.

Secularism is a good idea, and the Christian church's intent was to stop state interference, but secularism, properly done actually requires state interference with religions, but even-highhandedly.

Religion [no matter what type] is a synonym for special privlidge, special privlidge undermines good, open, and democratic government. Ergo, a truly secular government is obliged to interfere with religions to curb their special privileges. If it does not, it is not secular. Left to itself, the catholic church did nothing to address the child abuse that happened amounts its clergy. Indeed, it tried to cover it up to maintain its position or moral authority and to prevent other costs and sanctions, like criminal prosecution and compensation claims.
Although there are religious elements that are appalled by slavery, sexism, racism etc, a secular state is far more likely to rid the community of such bigotries because -again-special privlidge provides fertile ground for such bigotries to occur. Of course, the religions are not the sole source of bigotry, but the climate of special privlidge makes these difficult to eradicate. Various ideological positions also contribute to bigotry and privilege, but somehow most people are more aware, and prepared to address bigotries of non-specific, or rather non-religious origin, at least in recent history. Because education. :thumbup:

It is a bit like Gould's NOMA. In practical terms religion and science are obligated to breach NOMA, for their different reasons. Science must explore, and religion must retain its god of the gaps, else it dies. Secularism and religion are trapped in the same dynamic, when you get down to it.

igorfrankensteen · #4 by **igorfrankensteen** » May 17, 2016 4:10 am

darwinsbulldog:

secularism, properly done actually requires state interference with religions, but even-highhandedly.

What does that even mean? even-highhandedly? Sounds like a sneaky way to describe whip slapping someone with both the front AND back of your hand.

Religion [no matter what type] is a synonym for special privlidge

Er, no it isn't. YOu can google this. Type in "Religion: synonym," and I promise you will NOT find the phrase "special privlidge" listed as the primary, or even the tertiary synonym.

Calilasseia · #5 by **Calilasseia** » May 17, 2016 4:27 am

My understanding is that secularism in its modern form, arose out of a recognition that supernaturalists couldn't be trusted to behave themselves when they wielded power. This would certainly be the clear implication from Enlightenment era writings.

Arnold Layne · #6 by **Arnold Layne** » May 17, 2016 9:01 am

igorfrankensteen wrote:darwinsbulldog:
secularism, properly done actually requires state interference with religions, but even-highhandedly.

What does that even mean? even-highhandedly? Sounds like a sneaky way to describe whip slapping someone with both the front AND back of your hand.

I assumed darwinsbulldog meant "even-handedly," which, I'm sure you'll agree, makes more sense.

Briton · #7 by **Briton** » May 17, 2016 10:02 am

ScholasticSpastic wrote:Poorly chosen terms. Secularism and religion are not exclusive. Secularism was started by Christians to limit the interference of the State in their churches. It's a good idea, and I'm behind it, and I think the concept is important enough that we shouldn't water down its meaning with other, unrelated issues. Secularism =/= atheism.

A couple of weeks ago there was Methodist minister locally bemoaning the spread of secularism as another chapel was closing. Given the treatment they received from the established religion you'd think he'd understand the meaning of the term. So many equate it with non-belief.

ScholasticSpastic · #8 by **ScholasticSpastic** » May 17, 2016 2:47 pm

Briton wrote:
ScholasticSpastic wrote:Poorly chosen terms. Secularism and religion are not exclusive. Secularism was started by Christians to limit the interference of the State in their churches. It's a good idea, and I'm behind it, and I think the concept is important enough that we shouldn't water down its meaning with other, unrelated issues. Secularism =/= atheism.

A couple of weeks ago there was Methodist minister locally bemoaning the spread of secularism as another chapel was closing. Given the treatment they received from the established religion you'd think he'd understand the meaning of the term. So many equate it with non-belief.

Agreed. The Christians seem to have abandoned their idea for the most part. This would make sense, given their tendency to prefer to hold on to really shitty ideas for centuries. You've got to jettison some good ideas to make room for all the shitty ones.

Darwinsbulldog · #9 by **Darwinsbulldog** » May 18, 2016 6:38 am

igorfrankensteen wrote:

What does that even mean? even-highhandedly? Sounds like a sneaky way to describe whip slapping someone with both the front AND back of your hand.

Lol, how did that happen [autofucking-correct], I meant evenhandedly! It does mean bitch-slapping kiddie-rapists whether they be Christian, Muslim, Jewish or atheist for that matter. Or better, cuttin' off their balls. Whatever.

Er, no it isn't. YOu can google this. Type in "Religion: synonym," and I promise you will NOT find the phrase "special privlidge" listed as the primary, or even the tertiary synonym.

Nevertheless it is still true. Unless you can find me a religion that does not claim special privlidge. It is their bread and butter, ALL of them.

igorfrankensteen · **#10** by **igorfrankensteen** » May 18, 2016 11:49 pm

First you claim religion is synonymous with special privilege, now you're saying special privilege is some sort of breakfast snack?

Actually, I might agree with that.

Darwinsbulldog · **#11** by **Darwinsbulldog** » May 21, 2016 6:13 am

igorfrankensteen wrote:First you claim religion is synonymous with special privilege, now you're saying special privilege is some sort of breakfast snack?

Actually, I might agree with that.

Actually Igor, I am sorry but I think the concept of special privlidge in religion is irreducibly simple. A bit like saying: "all steel contains iron". Perhaps if you could give me an example of where any religion or sect does NOT claim any special privlidge perhaps we could debate that. :ask:

igorfrankensteen · **#12** by **igorfrankensteen** » May 21, 2016 3:42 pm

Darwinsbulldog wrote:
igorfrankensteen wrote:First you claim religion is synonymous with special privilege, now you're saying special privilege is some sort of breakfast snack?

Actually, I might agree with that.

Actually Igor, I am sorry but I think the concept of special privlidge in religion is irreducibly simple. A bit like saying: "all steel contains iron". Perhaps if you could give me an example of where any religion or sect does NOT claim any special privlidge perhaps we could debate that.

I think you are oversimplifying and muddling things up. You are making the accusation that religions were created in order to acquire special privileges for their followers.

Let's follow up on your "all steel contains iron" simile. You are doing the equivalent of claiming that because all steel by definition contains iron, that therefore all iron has elements of steel in it.

In the United States, for example, while many exceptions ARE made for religious concerns, it is also true that many restrictions are placed on religions, for state and national concerns.

Religion was here BEFORE the state was. It was, and is still often, an attempt to create a non-state based form of government. It is common in most secular governments, to make exceptions for that which was already in place, even when non-religious things are concerned.

You appear to be upset that some people do seek to have governments restructured to cater to their claimed religious beliefs, but the fact that that happens, doesn't mean that religion was invented in order to acquire such special privileges. Therefore broadly attacking all religion as you have here, is not supported by your central complaint issue, or the facts.

THWOTH · **#13** by **THWOTH** » May 21, 2016 6:55 pm

:book;

Darwinsbulldog · **#14** by **Darwinsbulldog** » May 22, 2016 1:44 am

igorfrankensteen wrote:
Darwinsbulldog wrote:
igorfrankensteen wrote:First you claim religion is synonymous with special privilege, now you're saying special privilege is some sort of breakfast snack?

Actually, I might agree with that.

Actually Igor, I am sorry but I think the concept of special privlidge in religion is irreducibly simple. A bit like saying: "all steel contains iron". Perhaps if you could give me an example of where any religion or sect does NOT claim any special privlidge perhaps we could debate that.

I think you are oversimplifying and muddling things up. You are making the accusation that religions were created in order to acquire special privileges for their followers.

Let's follow up on your "all steel contains iron" simile. You are doing the equivalent of claiming that because all steel by definition contains iron, that therefore all iron has elements of steel in it.

In the United States, for example, while many exceptions ARE made for religious concerns, it is also true that many restrictions are placed on religions, for state and national concerns.

Religion was here BEFORE the state was. It was, and is still often, an attempt to create a non-state based form of government. It is common in most secular governments, to make exceptions for that which was already in place, even when non-religious things are concerned.

You appear to be upset that some people do seek to have governments restructured to cater to their claimed religious beliefs, but the fact that that happens, doesn't mean that religion was invented in order to acquire such special privileges. Therefore broadly attacking all religion as you have here, is not supported by your central complaint issue, or the facts.

No, I didn't say religions were invented for special privlidge. Special privlidge is a natural consequence of religion though. You criticism of my steel analogy is invalid. All steels contain iron, but iron is not steel. Steel is iron with carbon added, but I digress.

Anyway, i ask again, give me an example of a religion or sect that does not claim special privlidge. And I don't mean in terms of access to state power either. Religions claim to special moral authority.
And you claim that religions came before government is just that. Social animals have leaders. Does that mean a bee hive had to acquire religion before it had a queen?
I love your logic-it is unique. :doh:

james1v · **#15** by **james1v** » May 22, 2016 2:20 am

igorfrankensteen wrote:
Darwinsbulldog wrote:
igorfrankensteen wrote:First you claim religion is synonymous with special privilege, now you're saying special privilege is some sort of breakfast snack?

Actually, I might agree with that.

Actually Igor, I am sorry but I think the concept of special privlidge in religion is irreducibly simple. A bit like saying: "all steel contains iron". Perhaps if you could give me an example of where any religion or sect does NOT claim any special privlidge perhaps we could debate that.

I think you are oversimplifying and muddling things up. You are making the accusation that religions were created in order to acquire special privileges for their followers.

Let's follow up on your "all steel contains iron" simile. You are doing the equivalent of claiming that because all steel by definition contains iron, that therefore all iron has elements of steel in it.

In the United States, for example, while many exceptions ARE made for religious concerns, it is also true that many restrictions are placed on religions, for state and national concerns.

Religion was here BEFORE the state was. It was, and is still often, an attempt to create a non-state based form of government. It is common in most secular governments, to make exceptions for that which was already in place, even when non-religious things are concerned.

You appear to be upset that some people do seek to have governments restructured to cater to their claimed religious beliefs, but the fact that that happens, doesn't mean that religion was invented in order to acquire such special privileges. Therefore broadly attacking all religion as you have here, is not supported by your central complaint issue, or the facts.

My huge...No it didn't. Ruled areas existed, before religion was invented. Ruled areas, "legitimised" by religious priests, came much later in human history, much later.

Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

Re: Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

Re: Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

Re: Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

Re: Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

Re: Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

Re: Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

Re: Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

Re: Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

Re: Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

Re: Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

Re: Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

Re: Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

Re: Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

Re: Religion Declining, Secularism Surging

Who is online