As a resident of Japan, a very secular country, I can assure you that people get on just fine without going to church. Human nature demands that we form groups. Like Perry said the new groups may be more like clubs than churches, but society will be just fine.
@@brialapoint2608 Yeah historically it's both, but that's like saying Northern Europe is christian. There are still some powerful sects, and there are temples and shrines everywhere (my house is on land leased from the temple a but higher up on the mountain), but religiosity doesn't permeate the culture.
@@brialapoint2608 Shintoism is kind of interesting in its own right, because it was really more of a decentralized set of beliefs and practices (basically a folk religion) before the Japanese state consolidated it into a religious identity during the Meiji Restoration for political purposes.
@@ichifish Well "religiosity" is a different concept in eastern countries than in the West. When you say that it doesn't permeate the culture, you're probably looking for cues that make sense in Europe and America but not over there. Religion is really just a way of life in Japan and many other Asian countries.
This was GREAT to listen to and learn from! I am an black woman, born and raised in church in Detroit, Mich. The MORE questions I asked in regards to religion, the LESS answers I got. So for the past 20 years or so, I have loudly and proudly identified as an Atheist. As a black Atheist, it was rare to find someone that thought like me, but that has absolutely changed for the better!! I have also gone from being a Democrat, to an Independent(looking for better than that as well!) So, Thank you for this informative video, knowledge is TRULY mfkn power!! Lol!
@@JeoJetsonmusic Yes, I am familiar with the Black Non Believers. I am subbed to their channel here on yt and I get their emails. Sent a video of Mandisa Thomas to a friend of mine around 2 months ago. As for the voting thing...no, I have not as of yet, voted for both parties. Not to say that I would not if the right person came along, but I don't see that happening from either party, lol! I was a "Bernie Bro"!!
As atheists are so quick to point out, the easiest way to become a non-believer is to actually read the Bible in its entirety, not just the passages your local preacher would bring up. That book that has some bizarre stuff in it that would make you question just how it is Western civilization could be so heavily influenced by it. But then again, I suppose you can break down just about any religion that way.
@@wafflesmomforlife9215 I’m of the belief vote blue no matter who for these reasons, there are only two parties and politics has become a team sport to where bipartisanship is not a thing and to not vote because you don’t agree completely is to basically say the parties are equivalent and it doesn’t matter who wins. Not to say this is you but it annoys me when people get caught up in the idealism of wanting a perfect candidate or a perfect political party and that’s just not how the real world works
As someone who was extremely religious from birth all the way through college, but who is now an atheist, this pastor paints a much grimmer picture than I think is realistic. When I went from attending church 2-3 times a week to not going at all, I didn't sink into social isolation. I replaced that church time with other of my interests, many of which included groups of people. I think he even mentioned an example of something that is replacing churches when he mentioned sports. Interests will be what people gather and organize around rather than worldviews. Socially, I see this as a huge win because you will be interacting with people of different worldviews, which generally make you a more well-rounded and empathetic person. As for charities and non-profits, there are already large secular charities that do as much good as churches. As more people become less religious, I see more secular charities popping up to fill the gaps. Also, like they mentioned, hopefully the government will also pick up some slack. Medicare For All, free childcare, and/or a UBI would go a long way to cover the bases that many churches cover now. I don't think the future is grim, in fact I think when people aren't tied to a worldview based on faith, the better our society will become. EDIT: Also, I'm a bit disappointed in 538 for not having another viewpoint on the matter that represents secularism. 538 is generally very fair, but in this discussion they only bring on a pastor to speak about the rising secularism and why he thinks it's a bad thing. In fact, Galen directly asked for good things that come with rising secularism, probably recognizing that the discussion was very one-sided, yet this pastor still couldn't provide a single benefit when there are a myriad.
I definitely agree with you. I grew up “sporadic catholic” as in my parents said we were catholic but we only went to church a few times a year. My parents are still religious in faith but don’t go to church or socialize around religion. I’d consider myself agnostic now and I agree that people organizing their social groups around their hobbies and interests is better for society for all the reasons you mentioned
@@neilwilson5785 That's another good point. We have so many examples of developed countries that are less religious than the US that have much better social outcomes for their population. So the number of churches does not necessarily correlate with social support.
@@neilwilson5785 exactly! I’ve never given money to a church but I’ve donated to many causes I believe in. I’ve got my Amazon smile account setup to donate to charities I care for
Unfortunately studies are more consistent with the pastor's views than your experiences (link from a non-religiously affiliated organization): www.philanthropyroundtable.org/philanthropy-magazine/less-god-less-giving. Glad that you found alternative social connections with people with different worldviews; meeting people with different views used to be part of what church provided (since a whole community went to the same church regardless of social class) and it's sad that's not the case anymore.
I was once evangelical Christian but I slowly started drifting away in my late teens and by my early 20’s I started identifying myself as agnostic. In my mid 20’s I drifted towards identifying as an atheist which I still identify myself as today. Part of my drift began when my youth group started talking negatively about the LGBT community and conflicted with my liberal views. The moment I specifically remember that started my drift was when I was 15 years old a bunch of my friends and I were playing the piano and singing along to Bohemian Rhapsody and the youth pastor put a stop to it because of Freddie Mercury’s lifestyle choices.
~"80% of people in Italy don't go to church once a week." (20% of people in Italy go to church at least once a *week*) ~"In the US, 30-40% of people go to church at least once a *month*." That's not an argument that Italy is more secular than the US.
What Ryan said about "policy before theology" is so interesting. I'm an atheist ex-evangelical, and the main reason why I left the church is because I left republican politics. I had been feeling like an outsider in the Southern Baptist church for years because of their ideology on evolution, abortion, homosexuality, and purity, before I finally began to really question the idea of God. In America, Devotion to the Party has taken the place of Piety. Maybe it's even taken the place of Patriotism. And yet almost everyone will tell you that both parties suck. It's amazing what wicked gods people will invent to worship.
The idea that people are now picking their religion based on their politics (instead of picking their politics based on their religion) is a very interesting shift. My parents took us to church sporadically growing up but there was no regularity so this is all very interesting to me as someone who didn’t grow up super religious
Basically, the density of jerks has always seemed higher in religious crowds and the more fiercely religious, the greater the density of jerks. Seemed like a thing to avoid.
As Andy Rooney put it: "I'd be more willing to accept religion, even if I didn't believe it, if I thought it made people nicer to each other but I don't think it does."
As a former conservative evangelical who is moving to the left and toward the "none", I find this discussion absolutely fascinating. Thanks for addressing this subject, I think this is one of the most well-informed discussions I have heard on this subject. Cheers!
The "none in particular" were called "submarine christians" when I was young, because they emerge once a year at Christmas in Church and are submerged for the rest of the time.
Very interesting conversation. Especially as I am a white woman in my 60s, graduate school educated (twice); I live in a non-urban, but not quite rural, part of conservative Oregon; I describe myself as a devout member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; and I'm a registered Democrat. By devout, I mean that I attend church weekly - even throughout the pandemic on Zoom, and now alternating half the congregation in person each week, with masks. Plus I read scriptures and pray daily. I have never voted for a Republican for US president (though I have voted for third party candidates plenty of times, starting with John Anderson), not even for Mitt Romney - we belong to the same church, but not the same party. I didn't vote for Bill Clinton, primarily because he was an adulterer, which for me was not just a religious issue, but also a women's issue. I wasn't a fan of Hillary Clinton, but there was no way I was voting for Trump, because he's a sociopath. My religion informs my politics, not the other way around. My religious affiliation is far more important to me than my political affiliation. God is not a Republican or a Democrat. Everyone is a complex conglomeration of identities, opinions, biases, prejudices, stereotypes, facts, realities, contradictions, nature v. nurture factors, etc. Polls capture generalities, not specifics. People are not statistics. I don't like being lumped with white evangelicals by liberals/progressives, because I belong to a conservative religion; but I find what passes for the Republican party to be increasingly morally reprehensible. Sorting out religion and politics is not clear cut.
I'm a member of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as well. I think pretty similarly to you. I tend to lean a little more to the left. I hope my religion informs my politics and not the other way around. Regardless, it makes me sad to hear that Americans on both sides of the aisle make politics their number one instead of religion. You can even make an argument that many Evangelicals are actually less religious because conservative politics have become their religion. That's my own opinion.
That may be true, but it could explain why people aren't going to Church, rather then just people becoming non-religious because they think Christians are Republican.
The emphasis on a political leaders personal religious views is what always threw me. That being said, I'm still kinda amazed a Mormon ended up running for president, given how odd Mormonism is when you actually look into it (...like...the idea of the president of the US believing that ancient Israelites came to North America and became native americans is...weird...). It also shows up in other things, like the importance of Israel and abortion in US politics. These things come up in European politics as well, but in Western Europe they are relatively minor political issues.
@@FCPaufUror yes indeed. The evangelicals and their obsession with killing ‘millions of unborn babies’ led them to vote in droves for that amoral Trump because he promised to appoint judges to overturn Roe V Wade. They turned a blind eye to his criminality for their ‘pet’ cause.
@@merrymachiavelli2041 when he ran against Obama and I was also watching Big Love (about Mormon polygamy) on HBO I decided to research what it actually was. Yowzaa.🤪
As a European, from my own experience talking with other Brits, yes, it does look odd to us (or at least Brits, Poland is more religious etc.). The UK is technically a theocracy and bishops are members of one of the Houses of Parliament, but a reasonably recent prime minster (Tony Blair) had to avoid talking about his religion faith as it would turn *off* voters (I can't source this fact as I can't quite remember which columnist I read who wrote about this). It's weird how the US is the reverse of the UK: officially secular, but culturally very religious.
Surprise, a pastor only sees ruin for a country that becomes less religious. If you're on step 35 in a process why would you assume that you should be able to see what step 89 will look like that far in advance?
This is a great discussion. One big problem that my congregation has is transitoriness. We have had a dozen young couples join the church in the last few years and then they leave to go to another city or they move out to the suburbs or they go to grad school. They are only here in town for 4-7 years and its hard for them to make a connection. When they "settle down" they are in their early thirties and havent attended church since high school and frankly are getting really bad messages about what church is.
It doesn't help that there were people carrying a life size crucifix during the Capitol Riots. Had there been Hindus or Muslims there as well, displaying their religious belief in the middle of an insurrection, people would've chalked it up to religious people in general and wouldn't get the impression that Christianity in the US is intrinsically tied to the conservative movement. It also doesn't help that so many churches have embraced a thoroughly unChristian person like Donald Trump as their standard bearer.
@@cquiroz7874 the issue is that other religions don't have an entrenched "white nationalist" wing in the United States. There can't have been any other religious symbol at the Capitol insurrection.
A pastor doesn't see the social organizations that are replacing churches. Color me shocked. With the connectivity of the world, people have more choices about who their associates are. When previous generations were forced together into spaces to find commonality, the current generations are finding that commonality with people over the internet. Rituals don't have to be religious. Sports, entertainment, these are the future tribes. What you enjoy doing as a person will be what determines your political affiliation rather than the specific place you gather on a Sunday. It's not surprising that such a phenomenon would be beyond what a pastor could envision.
I also thought about the growth of online communities when i heard him say that. I don't think that that necessarily solves the problem with polarization, though. Facebook, and other algorithm driven social media platforms, are radicalizing people even more today than they did 20 years ago. IMO the increasing unwillingness people have when it comes to embracing their own uncertainty is the main threat to the fabric of our society.
27:45 This is a big thing in particular with us in the LGBTQ community. I was raised as a gay Hispanic boy in a white Catholic church (Thanks Tennessee), and that and other experiences here drove me so far away from religion that my politics don't line up with church anymore. I know many other LGBTQ folks have flocked to more progressive Protestant churches, and some Protestant churches have even FRACTURED over LGBTQ issues.
We had a local church decide to vote on whether to allow same sex ceremonies. This was after our Synod voted to allow them. Anyway the vote was all of the members and the 2 pastors. Let's say the church has 30 members (basically true). The vote came down to 2 yes 28 no. The pastors were promptly fired. Here's another great example. A few years ago a couple attended the Christmas service with their grandson who is gay. Neither his husband nor children were in attendance, just him and his grandparents. His grandparents were shunned for months afterwards. Yes this is another ridiculously small church. The really crazy part is that it's a UCC church. The UCC has allowed gays and lesbians be pastors years before they themselves could have legally married. I know, because my aunt's pastor at her wedding was one. Point is many religious people only remember the hatred and angry parts and forget the loving, forgiveness and acceptance parts.
My attention jumped in around the 34 min mark and all i kept hearing was nun. I didn't realize until after that he meant none or non affiliated. I was just like "how many nuns are there?" And "4th generation nun?! Like how?"🤣
Its very rare I find myself fitting nicely into a stereotype.... But the way you describe 'nothing in particular' fits me extremely well both in terms of my life and my general beliefs.
@@DrMorpheus In my case I failed out of university after trying genuinely hard to pass my key courses in year 3 but being unable to. To your point I'm not sure of the demographic that cares about politics. I didn't really start to care until my mid 30's personally. Prior to that I'd still vote but my vote consisted of taking 15 minutes to review each parties stance on major issues and deciding 100% on that. Which...truth be told...is still a pretty decent way to vote if I'm being honest...you just remove yourself from the politicians and the drama, lol
The "Nothing in particular" guys go to church once or twice a year, but think about why. What happens once or twice a year? It's not hard to understand... Once or twice a year you meet your family on Easter and Christmas and then you go to church with them, because they go there. I'm a very outspoken atheist, but I go to church once a year on Christmas, because my family goes there too. If not for their families, 30% of the US population would never go to church, the synagogue or the mosque.
This yeah. Thankfully, I never had to go to Church for Christmas after I became a teenager, and Easter is becoming less and less every year thankfully.
There will be groups that emerge to cover the "good" that the church does in terms of the charitable works that churches do. Good people exist outside of churches that want to help others. Thinking that if churches go away that the vacuum won't be filled is just a lack of imagination.
What institutions will replace religious organisations doing charity? uhh.. the government? maybe actually having a social safety net like other developed nations?
How to build trust in community is absolutely for the 538 politics podcast to talk about. If not here then where? Not everyone can read the Atlantic. It's a conversation that needs to happen and I think you all should
"What are secular people going to do to organize and provide safety nets?" Well, non-profits have been one of the fastest growing sectors. Not to mention urban areas seeing larger organizing in the form of Mutual Aid Networks, or the almost doubling in size of DSA over the past year. Like honestly, it's pretty easy to look back on history and get a sense of where things are headed. We're really just facing the issues that were already there during WWII, so you'll likely see syndicalism come about in a new form, along with reincarnations of WTCU or Knights of Labor.
Right, but most non-profits are specific to an area and a few issues. Like, the ELCA (Lutheran) spends money for refugees on a national level by pooling money from all their churches. Churches in let's say Delaware wouldn't be able to do much locally, but you pool all the churches and it allows the ELCA to have refuge services, services for family planning/adoption/foster care, workforce development, youth services, addiction services, housing services, interpreters, etc. Do other non-profits/government agencies interact in these areas? Yes. But it's very difficult to find a one-stop-shop that houses them all. What needs to occur is that non-profits need to move beyond just a few services as well as kinda merge together and become national. Even the Humane Society at the national level is run completely different than your local Humane Society. I see a lot of non-profits like separate buildings of a University. They generally interact with each other, but they try to be as separate as possible to focus on what they care about most (same with the people who donate money to them. Some would rather donate money to refuge services vs adoption services which is kinda the same as donating to build a new business school building vs a new humanities building). At the end, they most value you can do with your money for a University is to donate to the endowment. Non-profits need more of a connection.
@@ChrisRepp1987 I think you're missing how non-profits and mutual aid networks use internet-mediated donations that draw donations from across the country, though (e.g., GoFundMe). Moreover, just because you may not specifically see them taking on these wider characters doesn't mean they aren't. I know mutual aid networks are developing solid relationships with each other to expand beyond their narrow reach. Of course, that doesn't mean mutual aid networks shouldn't taken on an ever-larger scale (I would argue they should be international). But without the resources that established non-profits wield and extract, it's all the more incumbent for people like you to get involved and expand them by building the bridging capital they need.
I'm an atheist and I was VERY offfended by the idea that non religious aren't giving. We have charitable causes worldwide. That is an UNACCEPTABLE argument and it is a SHAME that was even mentioned. And I noticed NO ONE argued it.
My sister and I are a textbook example Ryan's generation theory on the growth of Nonery. My grandparents started attending a nearby Unitarian Universalist church [almost None]. We quit going too church when I was five when our Presbyterian minister asked my dad why baptized Episcopalians were attending his church. I have no children and, outside of funerals or weddings, I have attended church less than ten times in 50 years. Same story for my sister, her kids, and I don't think her grandkids [one will be a hs junior next year] have ever been in a church.
Would have been nice to have some balance on your panel. I'm sure you could have found a "none", atheist, or agnostic who would have be happy to point out some of the downsides of organized religion. As Andy Rooney put it: "I'd be more willing to accept religion, even if I didn't believe it, if I thought it made people nicer to each other but I don't think it does." Europe has done just fine.
I see a lot of non-religious organizing on the left to provide social services like food and medication delivery through what's termed "mutual aid." This grew exponentially during the pandemic, where millenials with capital helped pay each others phone bills, rent, pay for groceries, medical bills, etc. I hope that expands in the next decade to help supplement the stated decline of church-based social services.
Blacks no matter how religious are with dems until gop stops being racist which will pretty much never happen. The pastor said it people pick religion based on their politics not the other way around
Agree! I’ve also wondered why conservatives don’t approve of government sponsored healthcare because that would be great for businesses. Paying employee health benefits is a large cost so if the government did it instead of private businesses I thought pro-business conservatives would be super happy about it... makes no sense to me why they oppose it
@@turtlescanfly7 Because a bunch of them and their base, particularly business owners are right libertarian assholes whose ideology basically consists of "fuck you got mine". See the Koch Brothers for more details on that ideology the miserable bastards. Also the healthcare industry would lose a lot of money.
Completely disagree with the notion that less churches would create “‘more tribalism”. The whole premise of church and religion is “believe what I believe or you’ll suffer for all eternity”. Literally doesn’t get more tribal than that.
Lmao as Perry talks about Yoga, reading Ibram X Kendi together, and going to Brunch... filling gaps left by less Church Aren't those a precise caricature of current UU church's program offerings? 🤣 ...their poblem is you can organize all that stuff on Facebook and skip the Church going...
I’d also like to point out something the Pastor missed. Saying you are “nothing in particular” is still more socially acceptable than saying you are an atheist. So there still may be a social desirability effect going on there in which now that nothing in particular is a viable option, a lot of atheists and agnostics are claiming that one rather than standing up proud.
I don't listen to 538 much any more (still miss Clare) but this was fantastic. I'm a left-leaning, mainline, urban protestant whose life and relationships have been deeply enriched by my faith community. For me, connecting to the divine with my head and heart has not been easy, but it has been worth it, especially during really challenging times like we've all experienced in the last year. I'm sorry that my experience isn't the norm and hate how much damage religion has done in people's lives. Peace everybody.
The thing Pastor Burge is missing is that those who leave the church not only tend to believe many things done by churches ought to be done by the government, but also tend to vote for more generous government programs. So the bigger the 'problem', the bigger the 'solution'.
14:19 I would be curious to see a more updated figure, considering the changes we've seen in culture since 2012. Perhaps there is not as much in relation to this topic, but I'll have to do some digging.
Leave it to a pastor to identify a group of "predominantly atheists and agnostics" as a "religious electorate". The language used here is key, especially when considering biases.
My favorite part of this is seeing Galen (who is my celebrity crush, so I'm always watching him) as he tries to suppress grins when he hears "nun" even though he knows it's "none"
I liked everything until the end. Secular charity organizations exist. Stupid to think people need to believe in a flying spaghetti monster to do generous things.
I'm not American, but I am a third generation "none" (well, I identify as atheist, but that's beside the point) - nobody I am closely related to is even remotely religious. I think some of my great-grandparents might have been nones as well. Religion just isn't relevant - it's always been something 'other people' do. Christianity is in the same camp as Islam as far as I'm concerned . - One interesting thing I wonder about in the US is whether religion (+ politics) will solidify into a pseudo-ethnic marker dividing 'white' people. If polarisation continues and is passed on generationally, then Evangelical White Americans and non-Evangelical White Americans might increasingly see themselves as not really the same group on a fundamental level. It would take time, but seems plausible, especially if other characteristics become tacked on (e.g. accent, geographic distribution, clothing, holiday celebration...etc)
I don't think this is any more true than someone in Europe might identify someone in a small rural town as fundamentally "other". Yes, people in small towns are more likely to be the descendants of other people from small towns, and based on my understanding of European politics, they also tend to hold more conservative, less tolerant attitudes. But there's a steady flow of people from small rural towns urban/suburban areas, so there's a certain amount of shared background there, too. Religion is exactly the same in America.
I'm not sure that most "nones" are anti-religion with the fervour needed for it to be a dividing marker for them. It's more "I don't care about that" ( if you don't follow football, you don't become anti-football, in most cases) It only becomes an issue for them if the religious try to impose on their freedoms.
@@viclange3826 I guess the process would rely upon Evangelical-Republicans being able to have high-ish generational retention rates (a bit like the Amish presumably - I'm sure people leave the community as young adults, but if the Amish still around after 2+ centuries, most must stay around). - In Europe, even in rural areas people are a lot less...morally passionate (not sure if that's the right way to put it) in their views. I can only really speak for the UK, but Conservatives in rural England _also_ almost never go to church and mentioning religion or issues like abortion is frowned upon in polite conversation. Support for the Conservative party there is more predicated on the view that they are 'sensible'/patriotic rather than moral fears over family values or 'socialism!', or even ideological devotion to the free market. It's a different dynamic than what you see with the religious right in the US, at least from what I can tell (although 'woke'/'anti-wokeness' is gaining ground as a divider - it's construed more that 'wokeness' is 'silly' rather than 'evil'.)
Religion in America never was about spirituality, it's merely a means to (absurdly) justify the exertion of power and control over others without accepting the responsibility of having to personally answer for such actions. If you want to live in a society where government and religion are one and the same, then go live in the Middle East...and look how that's working out for them in the long run.
I really want it to be possible for openly atheist people to run for office. We are the most underrepresented group in congress with zero open representation. It is so laughable that we are supposed to have separation of church and state yet put into action that collapses like wet toilet paper. Edit: Wanted to clarify that there is nothing stopping atheists from running but there is little to no hope for them winning.
I was raised in an agnostic houshold. My mother was raised jewish, my father the son of a methodisty preecher. All of my family is now unafiliated with any house of worship. I dont belive in god.
Why not public book clubs/lecture halls? That's what most Christian Churches really *are,* only the 'reading list' & 'lecture topics' all exclusively concern the Bible. I don't want to diss community centers, but they already exist. An actual cultural space for ppl. to find meaning *IS* important, it's just that the kinds of meaning ppl. are traditionally encouraged to gleam from Christianity aren't terribly resonant in this-day-&-age.
I don’t think that secularization is going to hurt Republicans much because political power in America is based on states, Congressional districts, and electoral votes
One thing this made me think of was Secretary Pete B. In the primary and how part of his campaign was an attempt to break from the idea that Christianity and religious identity were inherently conservative and Republicans. He argued that many of the ideals if christ aligned with left politics, and that community and the interpersonal should be key parts of the Democratic communications strategy. I think it worked to attract the demographics he was trying to reach, but in another way it was off putting to the secular part of the Democratic party. I saw many accusations that he would bring republican values to the Dems and halt progress, some out right stating they would never vote for a religious person. Just like we're seeing negative partisan ship drive politics, I think there's a current of that as applied to religion. The Evangelical voter might vote in ways to specifically reject a secular increase in power, and certain secular people may vote for or against something based on the perceived ties it has to Christianity. I do want to point out that there is an increase in alternative religious groups like neo paganism that exists in the left. It will be interesting to see if they shrink the none group or if there is tension between devout atheists and neo paganism at all.
I have to agree that it was disappointing to not have an atheist counterbalance to give their opinions on political trends and reasoning among the non-religious
@@lukeedwards7677 I figure Galen assumes all listeners are atheist. I thought the pastors views were interesting. Personally I would have been annoyed by an atheist "expert" 'splaining all of my own opinions back at me.
@@andyb2339 You'd be more annoyed by an atheist spokesman explaining the trends they've observed and been told about by other athiests than having a pastor do so? I get that you wouldn't want to be misrepresented by the guy who's supposed to speak for you, but I think the pastor's ending argument wasn't much better
@@lukeedwards7677 I just prefer to hear new ideas whether I agree with them or not. Sometimes podcasts have guests who say things the audience obviously already knows. For example, I am a liberal college educated Atheist/Agnostic who spends my day interacting with the same. I imagine the 538 audience is similar. So I feel like brining on an Atheist wouldn't teach me anything new. I'm not very familiar with how the religious right votes though, so I found the pastors views interesting. Also his particular take on Atheism wasn't something I had heard before (not that I necessarily agree with it).
@@andyb2339 That's fair enough, but even so, it would be nice to have someone juxtapose the pastor's statements - for myself, at least, I'm familiar with the far right perspective because I was raised as an Independent Baptist conservative and so understand the mindset I also suggest that conservative paradigms probably see athiesm and liberalism as connected for the most part; they also aren't interested in hearing our perspective either
I’m a “none”, sometimes I attend Second Baptist Church in Houston. There’s actually five of them. I’d describe it as a centrist congregation lots young people with liberal views. While I don’t attend often, I do have a very close connection with God and still believe the lord is our savior. The church’s problem is they think young people don’t read God’s word, when in face we do and realize that they’re against most of what Jesus preached.
As a non-American from a Catholic family, I'm confused why Catholic Americans would vote Republican. I agree that a lot of Catholic teachings actually are pretty Socialist. My parents who are actually religious have those views and really don't like Trump.
Who replaces churches? The welfare state does. This is Europe 101. We are so secular because the state is responsible for our welfare and not churches who monopolize that. And there's a good reason why secular young people are such Bernie fans.
He did such a good job of hiding his perspective and keeping to the data until he derisively answered his own question. The answer is "yes. The government on the most powerful nation ever to exist on earth can provide its citizens with food, clothing, and shelter when they need it AND maintain a largely market economy."
I really enjoyed this conversation, more than most recent 538 podcasts. The format was mostly educational -- there wasn't what I would call a debate. Although debates can be entertaining, I was happy just to be educated on the ways that religiosity in the US is evolving now. I was very surprised to hear how diverse the "Nones" are -- I hadn't realized the "nothing in particulars" were so different from atheists & agnostics. I was almost as surprised by the characterization of atheists as both well-educated and well-off -- since I happen to be one of those low-income (but well-educated) atheists.
i don't have any data to back this up, but I'm pretty convinced that not growing up with a religion makes it also less likely that someone falls prey to any other mass delusion or cult. It by no means immunizes you against these things but I'm quite sure that it's a net positive when people aren't brought up to believe crazy things, even though I am aware that religion helps to make people more resilient in crises.
If people don’t see “truth” in the actions of the church/faithful, they will lose their faith and/or leave the church. When the religious don’t appear to live the ideals of their faith (example: claiming to be pro-life from natural birth to natural death, and then looking the other way at the death penalty, and the suffering caused by racial/economic injustice; only focusing on abortions) others will naturally see such actions as hypocritical. At that point they will not see the truth of the faith in the actions of the faithful and it will turn them away from the faith. However if the faithful truly live their faith, rather than trying to enforce it legally, they would draw more people TO it. Instead the religious right has tried to leverage faith for political influence and power and it’s the primary reason people have been driven from the church more and more as the us population gets politically divided.
it's interesting that religion is tied to education in the US. i'm from Austria, and here religion began to decline in the years after the monarchy collapsed and with socialism becoming more popular. in the 20s conservative elites talked about how they have to "rechristianize the working classes" and when the fascists took over in the 30s, they cleansed socialists and jews from the universities (and bragged about them being free of jews now) to make sure that only good upstanding catholic fascists made it to higher positions of power. and they increased the power the church has over what is being taught in religion class (Austria doesn't have church-state-separation, so there is catholic religion class taught in schools). so in Austria the secularisation began with working class socialists, not so much with educated people. then there was the fascist backlash to it, which strenghed the church, and after the fascists lost (which wasn't immedietly after WW2, because the center right fascists took power again after the Nazis were defeated) religiousity continued to erode. even in rural and pretty conservative places (like where i'm from) religion doesn't play much of a role anymore in how people look at things. even tho the church as an institution still does (people still get baptized, get communion, married, etc in the church in rural Austria, less so in the cities). in Austria the church is intimetly tied to our elites (the monarchy initially, and later the business elites, incl the fascists) so it's not surprising that opposition to the church started with working class socialists. there's a fun line that the church used in a 'Hirtenbrief' (literally: shepherd letter) stating their relationship to the powerful: "we see in all elites, an image of the authority of god" ("wir sehen in jeder Obrigkeit einen Abglanz der Authoriät Gottes") the main reason there is a north-south split in Europe, is because of the influence of the church, the more a country/culture liberated itself from catholicism, the more civilized a country became xD that's why Austria is the most backward country, compared to similar countries in Europe (similar means: relatively rich, and in the power sphere of Germany, so: the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, maybe one or two other..) we're more catholic xD
For those of you that don't attend a Synagogue, Church, or Mosque regularly, I see a lot of value in community-building in houses of worship that other organizations don't give. By attending a house of worship with the same people, you not only share community with those people, but a common belief. Having a common belief with others further gives you a community because you are both "in it together" and have all committed to share a similar lifestyle. I've been in secular groups and religious groups. The secular groups I've been part of, there's never been a singular commitment to a specific lifestyle or specific belief system. Because of this lack of unity to lifestyle and commitment, I don't feel as connected or regular with other people in secular groups since we aren't as committed to seeing each other every week and we aren't committed to living the same kind of lifestyle. With that being said, I'm not saying that you can't find common ground with other people in clubs, sports teams, work places, etc., but I'm just saying there's another level of community when you've both committed to live the same kind of belief system and lifestyle. This is 100% my opinion. You are free to disagree.
I don't think anyone denies that churches and other houses of worship do provide a great sense of community. The issue (in my opinion of course) is everything else. It's the belief system itself. The one that causes LGBT people to have a hard time. The one that forces evolution to fight to be taught in schools. The one that constantly influences our politics and laws. That's what I don't like. The community is great, the beliefs are, IMO, less so.
People seek meaning in communities of belonging. Q-Anon is a contemporary example. Wild card events and social phenomena such as religious revivals do happen and I think it's uncertain whether current trends will continue indefinitely. The unreflective "nones" have these needs and thus are ripe pickings for charismatic leaders who offer connection and answers.
Why do Americans have such a fear of becoming like secular Europe?! Is Europe such a bad place? Our inequality levels are quite low. Our global influence is high. Our civil rights record is quite decent today. Our economic record is good too. Europe is the richest and most happy continent in the whole world while lacking a lot of natural resources the US has. So what are you scared of?
As an American half of us want to move to become more like you in some ways and the other half hates anything that isn't "American" in their eyes the same way the French do, but times like 1000 lol. Also fears of "sCaRy EuRo SoCiAlIsM" mind you that having a welfare state isn't socialist but most Americans couldn't give a shit what other countries say lol.
I've developed a model for why conservatives resist a social safety net so much, and it seems to bear out every time I apply it to what I observe in politics. Namely, the GOP doesn't want to give everyone free health care, because that would mean black people would get free healthcare. They don't want to provide paid parental leave for all because that would mean black people would get paid leave. They want free access to guns because, as one group of NRA supporters was overheard saying to each other, guns are what they need to defend themselves against black people. Seriously, take any political issue or vote, and watch how the GOP will always prioritize the policy that disfavors non-whites, even if it goes against principles or religious beliefs they've claimed to hold historically, and even if it goes against their own personal interests. As long as these conservative whites can keep black people oppressed and impoverished, they can feel superior to them, even as the entire world outside of their conservative tribe calls them out for being morally backward, racist, and ignorant. It's one of the last things remaining to let them feel special and superior, and they will cut off their nose just to spite their face and stay racist. Every time. Like ByeBye said, eveyone else in the US wants to be like Europe by a significant majority. But the way the electoral college and the senate is set up, though, about 30-40% of the country can block every single policy change that the rest of us would like to enact.
I'm curious about the agnostics-atheist ratio. Despite growing up Catholic I have never been very religious, and have never felt it as a significant force/institution influencing my life. My best friend is Jewish, and I feel like for both of us it is more like cultural window dressing, quaint and folksy.
Goodwill, Doctors Without Borders and UNICEF are already filling “the gap” in social services mentioned. And there will be more secular organizations in the future - not only from the public, but the private sector as well, as religion loses its structure and membership. Misinformation is not only spread by a lack of organization and rules, it is also spread by organized institutions with a great many rules (such as religious ones). I understand that you might be worried about change, but your focus should be on finding a better boat rather than trying to fix one that is filled with holes and sinking.
Regarding social services, what about mutual aid? Several non-religious organizations/movements like BLM or Occupy Wall Street have managed to organize around this, at least for some time.
It's not really that catholicism is very left-wing, it is more left-wing on welfare, but very right-wing on issues such as abortion or homosexuality. The Republican party is so far-right on issues of taxation and welfare that it puts off a lot of catholics used to some idea of a welfare state, but I still suspect that catholic heritage is more of a correlation than a causal link. It probably correlates to migration patterns and the degree to which they've been aggressively evangelized by US evangelical preachers.
![SahBabii - Viking [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/D37cL92JX0I/mqdefault.jpg)
I would like to see more non religious judges on the bench, especially on the Supreme Court
As a resident of Japan, a very secular country, I can assure you that people get on just fine without going to church. Human nature demands that we form groups. Like Perry said the new groups may be more like clubs than churches, but society will be just fine.
@@brialapoint2608 Yeah historically it's both, but that's like saying Northern Europe is christian. There are still some powerful sects, and there are temples and shrines everywhere (my house is on land leased from the temple a but higher up on the mountain), but religiosity doesn't permeate the culture.
@@brialapoint2608 Shintoism is kind of interesting in its own right, because it was really more of a decentralized set of beliefs and practices (basically a folk religion) before the Japanese state consolidated it into a religious identity during the Meiji Restoration for political purposes.
@@ichifish Well "religiosity" is a different concept in eastern countries than in the West. When you say that it doesn't permeate the culture, you're probably looking for cues that make sense in Europe and America but not over there. Religion is really just a way of life in Japan and many other Asian countries.
This was GREAT to listen to and learn from! I am an black woman, born and raised in church in Detroit, Mich. The MORE questions I asked in regards to religion, the LESS answers I got. So for the past 20 years or so, I have loudly and proudly identified as an Atheist. As a black Atheist, it was rare to find someone that thought like me, but that has absolutely changed for the better!!
I have also gone from being a Democrat, to an Independent(looking for better than that as well!)
So, Thank you for this informative video, knowledge is TRULY mfkn power!! Lol!
Check out black nonbelievers also I’m curious when you say you’re independent does that mean you actually vote for both parties?
@@JeoJetsonmusic Yes, I am familiar with the Black Non Believers. I am subbed to their channel here on yt and I get their emails. Sent a video of Mandisa Thomas to a friend of mine around 2 months ago.
As for the voting thing...no, I have not as of yet, voted for both parties. Not to say that I would not if the right person came along, but I don't see that happening from either party, lol! I was a "Bernie Bro"!!
As atheists are so quick to point out, the easiest way to become a non-believer is to actually read the Bible in its entirety, not just the passages your local preacher would bring up. That book that has some bizarre stuff in it that would make you question just how it is Western civilization could be so heavily influenced by it. But then again, I suppose you can break down just about any religion that way.
@@cquiroz7874 I could NOT have said it better!
@@wafflesmomforlife9215 I’m of the belief vote blue no matter who for these reasons, there are only two parties and politics has become a team sport to where bipartisanship is not a thing and to not vote because you don’t agree completely is to basically say the parties are equivalent and it doesn’t matter who wins. Not to say this is you but it annoys me when people get caught up in the idealism of wanting a perfect candidate or a perfect political party and that’s just not how the real world works
As someone who was extremely religious from birth all the way through college, but who is now an atheist, this pastor paints a much grimmer picture than I think is realistic. When I went from attending church 2-3 times a week to not going at all, I didn't sink into social isolation. I replaced that church time with other of my interests, many of which included groups of people. I think he even mentioned an example of something that is replacing churches when he mentioned sports. Interests will be what people gather and organize around rather than worldviews. Socially, I see this as a huge win because you will be interacting with people of different worldviews, which generally make you a more well-rounded and empathetic person. As for charities and non-profits, there are already large secular charities that do as much good as churches. As more people become less religious, I see more secular charities popping up to fill the gaps. Also, like they mentioned, hopefully the government will also pick up some slack. Medicare For All, free childcare, and/or a UBI would go a long way to cover the bases that many churches cover now. I don't think the future is grim, in fact I think when people aren't tied to a worldview based on faith, the better our society will become.
EDIT: Also, I'm a bit disappointed in 538 for not having another viewpoint on the matter that represents secularism. 538 is generally very fair, but in this discussion they only bring on a pastor to speak about the rising secularism and why he thinks it's a bad thing. In fact, Galen directly asked for good things that come with rising secularism, probably recognizing that the discussion was very one-sided, yet this pastor still couldn't provide a single benefit when there are a myriad.
I definitely agree with you. I grew up “sporadic catholic” as in my parents said we were catholic but we only went to church a few times a year. My parents are still religious in faith but don’t go to church or socialize around religion. I’d consider myself agnostic now and I agree that people organizing their social groups around their hobbies and interests is better for society for all the reasons you mentioned
True. We don't stop helping charities in Europe, even though we are far less religious than Americans.
@@neilwilson5785 That's another good point. We have so many examples of developed countries that are less religious than the US that have much better social outcomes for their population. So the number of churches does not necessarily correlate with social support.
@@neilwilson5785 exactly! I’ve never given money to a church but I’ve donated to many causes I believe in. I’ve got my Amazon smile account setup to donate to charities I care for
Unfortunately studies are more consistent with the pastor's views than your experiences (link from a non-religiously affiliated organization): www.philanthropyroundtable.org/philanthropy-magazine/less-god-less-giving. Glad that you found alternative social connections with people with different worldviews; meeting people with different views used to be part of what church provided (since a whole community went to the same church regardless of social class) and it's sad that's not the case anymore.
I believe the phrase, 'I didn't leave the church, the church left me' when it comes to Politics and Religion.
I was once evangelical Christian but I slowly started drifting away in my late teens and by my early 20’s I started identifying myself as agnostic. In my mid 20’s I drifted towards identifying as an atheist which I still identify myself as today. Part of my drift began when my youth group started talking negatively about the LGBT community and conflicted with my liberal views. The moment I specifically remember that started my drift was when I was 15 years old a bunch of my friends and I were playing the piano and singing along to Bohemian Rhapsody and the youth pastor put a stop to it because of Freddie Mercury’s lifestyle choices.
Never stand for Queen slander, good for you.
~"80% of people in Italy don't go to church once a week." (20% of people in Italy go to church at least once a *week*)
~"In the US, 30-40% of people go to church at least once a *month*."
That's not an argument that Italy is more secular than the US.
And Italy is like the religious capital lol
I would know, I’m part Italian and I’m like the only atheist in my family lol
But Italy is seen as being one of the more religious countries of Europe. The UK is a whole lot less religious than Italy, for example.
What Ryan said about "policy before theology" is so interesting. I'm an atheist ex-evangelical, and the main reason why I left the church is because I left republican politics. I had been feeling like an outsider in the Southern Baptist church for years because of their ideology on evolution, abortion, homosexuality, and purity, before I finally began to really question the idea of God.
In America, Devotion to the Party has taken the place of Piety. Maybe it's even taken the place of Patriotism. And yet almost everyone will tell you that both parties suck. It's amazing what wicked gods people will invent to worship.
I’m apart of an atheist group that helps homeless and transients every month. We care about humans not who you’re affiliated with!
The idea that people are now picking their religion based on their politics (instead of picking their politics based on their religion) is a very interesting shift. My parents took us to church sporadically growing up but there was no regularity so this is all very interesting to me as someone who didn’t grow up super religious
Basically, the density of jerks has always seemed higher in religious crowds and the more fiercely religious, the greater the density of jerks. Seemed like a thing to avoid.
As Andy Rooney put it: "I'd be more willing to accept religion, even if I didn't believe it, if I thought it made people nicer to each other but I don't think it does."
One wonders if there's a different version of the Gospels being used in evangelical circles..
As a former conservative evangelical who is moving to the left and toward the "none", I find this discussion absolutely fascinating. Thanks for addressing this subject, I think this is one of the most well-informed discussions I have heard on this subject. Cheers!
The "none in particular" were called "submarine christians" when I was young, because they emerge once a year at Christmas in Church and are submerged for the rest of the time.
CEOs- Christmas and Easter onlys
Very interesting conversation. Especially as I am a white woman in my 60s, graduate school educated (twice); I live in a non-urban, but not quite rural, part of conservative Oregon; I describe myself as a devout member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; and I'm a registered Democrat. By devout, I mean that I attend church weekly - even throughout the pandemic on Zoom, and now alternating half the congregation in person each week, with masks. Plus I read scriptures and pray daily. I have never voted for a Republican for US president (though I have voted for third party candidates plenty of times, starting with John Anderson), not even for Mitt Romney - we belong to the same church, but not the same party. I didn't vote for Bill Clinton, primarily because he was an adulterer, which for me was not just a religious issue, but also a women's issue. I wasn't a fan of Hillary Clinton, but there was no way I was voting for Trump, because he's a sociopath. My religion informs my politics, not the other way around. My religious affiliation is far more important to me than my political affiliation. God is not a Republican or a Democrat. Everyone is a complex conglomeration of identities, opinions, biases, prejudices, stereotypes, facts, realities, contradictions, nature v. nurture factors, etc. Polls capture generalities, not specifics. People are not statistics. I don't like being lumped with white evangelicals by liberals/progressives, because I belong to a conservative religion; but I find what passes for the Republican party to be increasingly morally reprehensible. Sorting out religion and politics is not clear cut.
I'm a member of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as well. I think pretty similarly to you. I tend to lean a little more to the left. I hope my religion informs my politics and not the other way around.
Regardless, it makes me sad to hear that Americans on both sides of the aisle make politics their number one instead of religion. You can even make an argument that many Evangelicals are actually less religious because conservative politics have become their religion. That's my own opinion.
Thanks for sharing, this was fascinating to read as a "none"!
That may be true, but it could explain why people aren't going to Church, rather then just people becoming non-religious because they think Christians are Republican.
Thank God :)
😂😂😂😂😂😂
I had a great listens from across the pond. I find America and it's religiosity fascinating
I heard for years that in Europe they are shocked by ‘religiosity’ and how it shaped our politics. They thought it was silly.
It is indeed shocking how much the US have abandoned their seperation of government and religion in the past 70 years. What a massive travesty.
The emphasis on a political leaders personal religious views is what always threw me. That being said, I'm still kinda amazed a Mormon ended up running for president, given how odd Mormonism is when you actually look into it (...like...the idea of the president of the US believing that ancient Israelites came to North America and became native americans is...weird...).
It also shows up in other things, like the importance of Israel and abortion in US politics. These things come up in European politics as well, but in Western Europe they are relatively minor political issues.
@@FCPaufUror yes indeed. The evangelicals and their obsession with killing ‘millions of unborn babies’ led them to vote in droves for that amoral Trump because he promised to appoint judges to overturn Roe V Wade. They turned a blind eye to his criminality for their ‘pet’ cause.
@@merrymachiavelli2041 when he ran against Obama and I was also watching Big Love (about Mormon polygamy) on HBO I decided to research what it actually was. Yowzaa.🤪
As a European, from my own experience talking with other Brits, yes, it does look odd to us (or at least Brits, Poland is more religious etc.). The UK is technically a theocracy and bishops are members of one of the Houses of Parliament, but a reasonably recent prime minster (Tony Blair) had to avoid talking about his religion faith as it would turn *off* voters (I can't source this fact as I can't quite remember which columnist I read who wrote about this). It's weird how the US is the reverse of the UK: officially secular, but culturally very religious.
Surprise, a pastor only sees ruin for a country that becomes less religious. If you're on step 35 in a process why would you assume that you should be able to see what step 89 will look like that far in advance?
This is a great discussion. One big problem that my congregation has is transitoriness. We have had a dozen young couples join the church in the last few years and then they leave to go to another city or they move out to the suburbs or they go to grad school. They are only here in town for 4-7 years and its hard for them to make a connection. When they "settle down" they are in their early thirties and havent attended church since high school and frankly are getting really bad messages about what church is.
It doesn't help that there were people carrying a life size crucifix during the Capitol Riots. Had there been Hindus or Muslims there as well, displaying their religious belief in the middle of an insurrection, people would've chalked it up to religious people in general and wouldn't get the impression that Christianity in the US is intrinsically tied to the conservative movement. It also doesn't help that so many churches have embraced a thoroughly unChristian person like Donald Trump as their standard bearer.
@@cquiroz7874 the issue is that other religions don't have an entrenched "white nationalist" wing in the United States. There can't have been any other religious symbol at the Capitol insurrection.
A pastor doesn't see the social organizations that are replacing churches. Color me shocked. With the connectivity of the world, people have more choices about who their associates are. When previous generations were forced together into spaces to find commonality, the current generations are finding that commonality with people over the internet. Rituals don't have to be religious. Sports, entertainment, these are the future tribes. What you enjoy doing as a person will be what determines your political affiliation rather than the specific place you gather on a Sunday. It's not surprising that such a phenomenon would be beyond what a pastor could envision.
I also thought about the growth of online communities when i heard him say that. I don't think that that necessarily solves the problem with polarization, though. Facebook, and other algorithm driven social media platforms, are radicalizing people even more today than they did 20 years ago. IMO the increasing unwillingness people have when it comes to embracing their own uncertainty is the main threat to the fabric of our society.
Galen Druke sounds like something I would name a D&D character
27:45 This is a big thing in particular with us in the LGBTQ community. I was raised as a gay Hispanic boy in a white Catholic church (Thanks Tennessee), and that and other experiences here drove me so far away from religion that my politics don't line up with church anymore. I know many other LGBTQ folks have flocked to more progressive Protestant churches, and some Protestant churches have even FRACTURED over LGBTQ issues.
We had a local church decide to vote on whether to allow same sex ceremonies. This was after our Synod voted to allow them. Anyway the vote was all of the members and the 2 pastors. Let's say the church has 30 members (basically true). The vote came down to 2 yes 28 no. The pastors were promptly fired.
Here's another great example. A few years ago a couple attended the Christmas service with their grandson who is gay. Neither his husband nor children were in attendance, just him and his grandparents. His grandparents were shunned for months afterwards. Yes this is another ridiculously small church. The really crazy part is that it's a UCC church. The UCC has allowed gays and lesbians be pastors years before they themselves could have legally married. I know, because my aunt's pastor at her wedding was one.
Point is many religious people only remember the hatred and angry parts and forget the loving, forgiveness and acceptance parts.
One of the strongest 538 podcasts since Clare left.
My attention jumped in around the 34 min mark and all i kept hearing was nun. I didn't realize until after that he meant none or non affiliated. I was just like "how many nuns are there?" And "4th generation nun?! Like how?"🤣
I was confused at first too.
Same, I thoroughly enjoyed imaging the implications
Well, you see, when a mommy nun and a daddy nun love each other very much... 😶😅🤣
Its very rare I find myself fitting nicely into a stereotype....
But the way you describe 'nothing in particular' fits me extremely well both in terms of my life and my general beliefs.
What about level of education? How many nones are viewing 538 political podcasts?
@@DrMorpheus In my case I failed out of university after trying genuinely hard to pass my key courses in year 3 but being unable to.
To your point I'm not sure of the demographic that cares about politics. I didn't really start to care until my mid 30's personally.
Prior to that I'd still vote but my vote consisted of taking 15 minutes to review each parties stance on major issues and deciding 100% on that. Which...truth be told...is still a pretty decent way to vote if I'm being honest...you just remove yourself from the politicians and the drama, lol
The "nones" are not a static group. Every single agnostic and every single atheist, was a "none" on their way to becoming an agnostic or an atheist.
A great number of us went directly from church goer to atheist or agnostic without any "nothing in particular" phase in between.
Oh, nones not nuns.
As a Catholic, I found it very odd to hear people talking about non-religious nuns!
Good to see
The "Nothing in particular" guys go to church once or twice a year, but think about why. What happens once or twice a year? It's not hard to understand...
Once or twice a year you meet your family on Easter and Christmas and then you go to church with them, because they go there.
I'm a very outspoken atheist, but I go to church once a year on Christmas, because my family goes there too.
If not for their families, 30% of the US population would never go to church, the synagogue or the mosque.
This yeah. Thankfully, I never had to go to Church for Christmas after I became a teenager, and Easter is becoming less and less every year thankfully.
It’s because the Christian church is obsessed with trump and politics, its a huge turn-off!!
There will be groups that emerge to cover the "good" that the church does in terms of the charitable works that churches do. Good people exist outside of churches that want to help others. Thinking that if churches go away that the vacuum won't be filled is just a lack of imagination.
What institutions will replace religious organisations doing charity? uhh.. the government? maybe actually having a social safety net like other developed nations?
How to build trust in community is absolutely for the 538 politics podcast to talk about. If not here then where? Not everyone can read the Atlantic. It's a conversation that needs to happen and I think you all should
Best podcast ever!
Best news this year! ❤️
As a white liberal in the United Methodist Church, this really hit home and we see that in the church.
This is the best thing with the lowest views. Well, I really like it. Great insights.
"What are secular people going to do to organize and provide safety nets?"
Well, non-profits have been one of the fastest growing sectors. Not to mention urban areas seeing larger organizing in the form of Mutual Aid Networks, or the almost doubling in size of DSA over the past year.
Like honestly, it's pretty easy to look back on history and get a sense of where things are headed. We're really just facing the issues that were already there during WWII, so you'll likely see syndicalism come about in a new form, along with reincarnations of WTCU or Knights of Labor.
Right, but most non-profits are specific to an area and a few issues.
Like, the ELCA (Lutheran) spends money for refugees on a national level by pooling money from all their churches. Churches in let's say Delaware wouldn't be able to do much locally, but you pool all the churches and it allows the ELCA to have refuge services, services for family planning/adoption/foster care, workforce development, youth services, addiction services, housing services, interpreters, etc.
Do other non-profits/government agencies interact in these areas? Yes. But it's very difficult to find a one-stop-shop that houses them all.
What needs to occur is that non-profits need to move beyond just a few services as well as kinda merge together and become national.
Even the Humane Society at the national level is run completely different than your local Humane Society.
I see a lot of non-profits like separate buildings of a University. They generally interact with each other, but they try to be as separate as possible to focus on what they care about most (same with the people who donate money to them. Some would rather donate money to refuge services vs adoption services which is kinda the same as donating to build a new business school building vs a new humanities building).
At the end, they most value you can do with your money for a University is to donate to the endowment. Non-profits need more of a connection.
@@ChrisRepp1987 I think you're missing how non-profits and mutual aid networks use internet-mediated donations that draw donations from across the country, though (e.g., GoFundMe). Moreover, just because you may not specifically see them taking on these wider characters doesn't mean they aren't. I know mutual aid networks are developing solid relationships with each other to expand beyond their narrow reach.
Of course, that doesn't mean mutual aid networks shouldn't taken on an ever-larger scale (I would argue they should be international). But without the resources that established non-profits wield and extract, it's all the more incumbent for people like you to get involved and expand them by building the bridging capital they need.
I'm an atheist and I was VERY offfended by the idea that non religious aren't giving. We have charitable causes worldwide. That is an UNACCEPTABLE argument and it is a SHAME that was even mentioned. And I noticed NO ONE argued it.
listening to this from the UK is as fascinating as it is confusing
My sister and I are a textbook example Ryan's generation theory on the growth of Nonery. My grandparents started attending a nearby Unitarian Universalist church [almost None]. We quit going too church when I was five when our Presbyterian minister asked my dad why baptized Episcopalians were attending his church. I have no children and, outside of funerals or weddings, I have attended church less than ten times in 50 years. Same story for my sister, her kids, and I don't think her grandkids [one will be a hs junior next year] have ever been in a church.
Would have been nice to have some balance on your panel. I'm sure you could have found a "none", atheist, or agnostic who would have be happy to point out some of the downsides of organized religion. As Andy Rooney put it: "I'd be more willing to accept religion, even if I didn't believe it, if I thought it made people nicer to each other but I don't think it does." Europe has done just fine.
I see a lot of non-religious organizing on the left to provide social services like food and medication delivery through what's termed "mutual aid." This grew exponentially during the pandemic, where millenials with capital helped pay each others phone bills, rent, pay for groceries, medical bills, etc. I hope that expands in the next decade to help supplement the stated decline of church-based social services.
Blacks no matter how religious are with dems until gop stops being racist which will pretty much never happen. The pastor said it people pick religion based on their politics not the other way around
So without churches the need for real strong universal social safety nets will be highlighted.... sorry was this supposed to be a bad thing?
Agree! I’ve also wondered why conservatives don’t approve of government sponsored healthcare because that would be great for businesses. Paying employee health benefits is a large cost so if the government did it instead of private businesses I thought pro-business conservatives would be super happy about it... makes no sense to me why they oppose it
@@turtlescanfly7 Because a bunch of them and their base, particularly business owners are right libertarian assholes whose ideology basically consists of "fuck you got mine". See the Koch Brothers for more details on that ideology the miserable bastards. Also the healthcare industry would lose a lot of money.
Hell yeeaaahhh! Where my nones at?!
Completely disagree with the notion that less churches would create “‘more tribalism”. The whole premise of church and religion is “believe what I believe or you’ll suffer for all eternity”. Literally doesn’t get more tribal than that.
Lmao as Perry talks about Yoga, reading Ibram X Kendi together, and going to Brunch... filling gaps left by less Church
Aren't those a precise caricature of current UU church's program offerings? 🤣
...their poblem is you can organize all that stuff on Facebook and skip the Church going...
I’d also like to point out something the Pastor missed. Saying you are “nothing in particular” is still more socially acceptable than saying you are an atheist. So there still may be a social desirability effect going on there in which now that nothing in particular is a viable option, a lot of atheists and agnostics are claiming that one rather than standing up proud.
True, in my profession, I cannot "out" myself as an atheist b/c we would lose clients. It's a shame.
I don't listen to 538 much any more (still miss Clare) but this was fantastic. I'm a left-leaning, mainline, urban protestant whose life and relationships have been deeply enriched by my faith community. For me, connecting to the divine with my head and heart has not been easy, but it has been worth it, especially during really challenging times like we've all experienced in the last year. I'm sorry that my experience isn't the norm and hate how much damage religion has done in people's lives. Peace everybody.
The thing Pastor Burge is missing is that those who leave the church not only tend to believe many things done by churches ought to be done by the government, but also tend to vote for more generous government programs. So the bigger the 'problem', the bigger the 'solution'.
14:19 I would be curious to see a more updated figure, considering the changes we've seen in culture since 2012. Perhaps there is not as much in relation to this topic, but I'll have to do some digging.
Atheists are up to about 50 now, assuming he's talking about Pew's religion thermometer.
Christianity poisened Rome, Britain and America.
Leave it to a pastor to identify a group of "predominantly atheists and agnostics" as a "religious electorate". The language used here is key, especially when considering biases.
My favorite part of this is seeing Galen (who is my celebrity crush, so I'm always watching him) as he tries to suppress grins when he hears "nun" even though he knows it's "none"
My CC kept changing "nones" to "nuns" which was confusing for a while😂
I liked everything until the end. Secular charity organizations exist. Stupid to think people need to believe in a flying spaghetti monster to do generous things.
I'm not American, but I am a third generation "none" (well, I identify as atheist, but that's beside the point) - nobody I am closely related to is even remotely religious. I think some of my great-grandparents might have been nones as well. Religion just isn't relevant - it's always been something 'other people' do. Christianity is in the same camp as Islam as far as I'm concerned .
-
One interesting thing I wonder about in the US is whether religion (+ politics) will solidify into a pseudo-ethnic marker dividing 'white' people. If polarisation continues and is passed on generationally, then Evangelical White Americans and non-Evangelical White Americans might increasingly see themselves as not really the same group on a fundamental level. It would take time, but seems plausible, especially if other characteristics become tacked on (e.g. accent, geographic distribution, clothing, holiday celebration...etc)
I don't think this is any more true than someone in Europe might identify someone in a small rural town as fundamentally "other". Yes, people in small towns are more likely to be the descendants of other people from small towns, and based on my understanding of European politics, they also tend to hold more conservative, less tolerant attitudes. But there's a steady flow of people from small rural towns urban/suburban areas, so there's a certain amount of shared background there, too. Religion is exactly the same in America.
I'm not sure that most "nones" are anti-religion with the fervour needed for it to be a dividing marker for them. It's more "I don't care about that" ( if you don't follow football, you don't become anti-football, in most cases) It only becomes an issue for them if the religious try to impose on their freedoms.
@@nomadpurple6154 A friend coined the term "aptheist" to describe his beliefs.
@@viclange3826 I guess the process would rely upon Evangelical-Republicans being able to have high-ish generational retention rates (a bit like the Amish presumably - I'm sure people leave the community as young adults, but if the Amish still around after 2+ centuries, most must stay around).
-
In Europe, even in rural areas people are a lot less...morally passionate (not sure if that's the right way to put it) in their views. I can only really speak for the UK, but Conservatives in rural England _also_ almost never go to church and mentioning religion or issues like abortion is frowned upon in polite conversation. Support for the Conservative party there is more predicated on the view that they are 'sensible'/patriotic rather than moral fears over family values or 'socialism!', or even ideological devotion to the free market. It's a different dynamic than what you see with the religious right in the US, at least from what I can tell (although 'woke'/'anti-wokeness' is gaining ground as a divider - it's construed more that 'wokeness' is 'silly' rather than 'evil'.)
It took me seven minutes to realizes they're saying "none"s, not "nuns"
Well that was a bizarrely one-sided discussion at times..
The convolution of religion and politics reveals that people are picking social camps instead of independently evaluating each policy.
Religion in America never was about spirituality, it's merely a means to (absurdly) justify the exertion of power and control over others without accepting the responsibility of having to personally answer for such actions.
If you want to live in a society where government and religion are one and the same, then go live in the Middle East...and look how that's working out for them in the long run.
Isn't that all religions past and present and globally, to justify the exertion of power?
All my family are Nones but all of them are Republican voters except me who is a strident atheist
That's an encouraging discussion. Maybe we could get to a point where churches need to pay taxes like the rest of us.
I really want it to be possible for openly atheist people to run for office. We are the most underrepresented group in congress with zero open representation. It is so laughable that we are supposed to have separation of church and state yet put into action that collapses like wet toilet paper.
Edit: Wanted to clarify that there is nothing stopping atheists from running but there is little to no hope for them winning.
7:15 is when I realized they were saying “nones” and not “nuns”.
Calling them nones is stupid tbh
And deeply unimaginative
I was raised in an agnostic houshold. My mother was raised jewish, my father the son of a methodisty preecher. All of my family is now unafiliated with any house of worship. I dont belive in god.
good talk.
Why can't churches transition to community centres? Community centres can play the same supportive role while being more inclusive.
Why not public book clubs/lecture halls? That's what most Christian Churches really *are,* only the 'reading list' & 'lecture topics' all exclusively concern the Bible.
I don't want to diss community centers, but they already exist. An actual cultural space for ppl. to find meaning *IS* important, it's just that the kinds of meaning ppl. are traditionally encouraged to gleam from Christianity aren't terribly resonant in this-day-&-age.
I don’t think that secularization is going to hurt Republicans much because political power in America is based on states, Congressional districts, and electoral votes
One thing this made me think of was Secretary Pete B. In the primary and how part of his campaign was an attempt to break from the idea that Christianity and religious identity were inherently conservative and Republicans. He argued that many of the ideals if christ aligned with left politics, and that community and the interpersonal should be key parts of the Democratic communications strategy. I think it worked to attract the demographics he was trying to reach, but in another way it was off putting to the secular part of the Democratic party. I saw many accusations that he would bring republican values to the Dems and halt progress, some out right stating they would never vote for a religious person. Just like we're seeing negative partisan ship drive politics, I think there's a current of that as applied to religion. The Evangelical voter might vote in ways to specifically reject a secular increase in power, and certain secular people may vote for or against something based on the perceived ties it has to Christianity.
I do want to point out that there is an increase in alternative religious groups like neo paganism that exists in the left. It will be interesting to see if they shrink the none group or if there is tension between devout atheists and neo paganism at all.
YES I DO WANT GOVERNMENT TO FILL THE GAP.
God, what a frustrating listen.
I have to agree that it was disappointing to not have an atheist counterbalance to give their opinions on political trends and reasoning among the non-religious
@@lukeedwards7677 I figure Galen assumes all listeners are atheist. I thought the pastors views were interesting. Personally I would have been annoyed by an atheist "expert" 'splaining all of my own opinions back at me.
@@andyb2339 You'd be more annoyed by an atheist spokesman explaining the trends they've observed and been told about by other athiests than having a pastor do so?
I get that you wouldn't want to be misrepresented by the guy who's supposed to speak for you, but I think the pastor's ending argument wasn't much better
@@lukeedwards7677 I just prefer to hear new ideas whether I agree with them or not. Sometimes podcasts have guests who say things the audience obviously already knows. For example, I am a liberal college educated Atheist/Agnostic who spends my day interacting with the same. I imagine the 538 audience is similar. So I feel like brining on an Atheist wouldn't teach me anything new. I'm not very familiar with how the religious right votes though, so I found the pastors views interesting. Also his particular take on Atheism wasn't something I had heard before (not that I necessarily agree with it).
@@andyb2339 That's fair enough, but even so, it would be nice to have someone juxtapose the pastor's statements - for myself, at least, I'm familiar with the far right perspective because I was raised as an Independent Baptist conservative and so understand the mindset
I also suggest that conservative paradigms probably see athiesm and liberalism as connected for the most part; they also aren't interested in hearing our perspective either
I’m a “none”, sometimes I attend Second Baptist Church in Houston. There’s actually five of them. I’d describe it as a centrist congregation lots young people with liberal views. While I don’t attend often, I do have a very close connection with God and still believe the lord is our savior. The church’s problem is they think young people don’t read God’s word, when in face we do and realize that they’re against most of what Jesus preached.
As a non-American from a Catholic family, I'm confused why Catholic Americans would vote Republican. I agree that a lot of Catholic teachings actually are pretty Socialist. My parents who are actually religious have those views and really don't like Trump.
it is long past time to tax all churches like a business.
Bring back Clare
Not understanding that being an atheist and an agnostic isn’t mutually exclusive, rather answers to two separate questions is pretty embarrassing 😳
Who replaces churches? The welfare state does.
This is Europe 101. We are so secular because the state is responsible for our welfare and not churches who monopolize that.
And there's a good reason why secular young people are such Bernie fans.
He did such a good job of hiding his perspective and keeping to the data until he derisively answered his own question. The answer is "yes. The government on the most powerful nation ever to exist on earth can provide its citizens with food, clothing, and shelter when they need it AND maintain a largely market economy."
Weird. This ep must be good to get this much engagement
I really enjoyed this conversation, more than most recent 538 podcasts. The format was mostly educational -- there wasn't what I would call a debate. Although debates can be entertaining, I was happy just to be educated on the ways that religiosity in the US is evolving now. I was very surprised to hear how diverse the "Nones" are -- I hadn't realized the "nothing in particulars" were so different from atheists & agnostics. I was almost as surprised by the characterization of atheists as both well-educated and well-off -- since I happen to be one of those low-income (but well-educated) atheists.
Perry on the money as always
Considering the entire podcast was about them, you probably should have included someone who falls in the none category.
i don't have any data to back this up, but I'm pretty convinced that not growing up with a religion makes it also less likely that someone falls prey to any other mass delusion or cult. It by no means immunizes you against these things but I'm quite sure that it's a net positive when people aren't brought up to believe crazy things, even though I am aware that religion helps to make people more resilient in crises.
If people don’t see “truth” in the actions of the church/faithful, they will lose their faith and/or leave the church.
When the religious don’t appear to live the ideals of their faith (example: claiming to be pro-life from natural birth to natural death, and then looking the other way at the death penalty, and the suffering caused by racial/economic injustice; only focusing on abortions) others will naturally see such actions as hypocritical. At that point they will not see the truth of the faith in the actions of the faithful and it will turn them away from the faith.
However if the faithful truly live their faith, rather than trying to enforce it legally, they would draw more people TO it.
Instead the religious right has tried to leverage faith for political influence and power and it’s the primary reason people have been driven from the church more and more as the us population gets politically divided.
This may mean people more likely to do things related with science like more likely to tackle climate change and take a COVID shot.
This discussion completely missed the angle that the epistemological approach of agnostic-atheists is completely different from the religious
it's interesting that religion is tied to education in the US. i'm from Austria, and here religion began to decline in the years after the monarchy collapsed and with socialism becoming more popular. in the 20s conservative elites talked about how they have to "rechristianize the working classes" and when the fascists took over in the 30s, they cleansed socialists and jews from the universities (and bragged about them being free of jews now) to make sure that only good upstanding catholic fascists made it to higher positions of power. and they increased the power the church has over what is being taught in religion class (Austria doesn't have church-state-separation, so there is catholic religion class taught in schools). so in Austria the secularisation began with working class socialists, not so much with educated people. then there was the fascist backlash to it, which strenghed the church, and after the fascists lost (which wasn't immedietly after WW2, because the center right fascists took power again after the Nazis were defeated) religiousity continued to erode. even in rural and pretty conservative places (like where i'm from) religion doesn't play much of a role anymore in how people look at things. even tho the church as an institution still does (people still get baptized, get communion, married, etc in the church in rural Austria, less so in the cities).
in Austria the church is intimetly tied to our elites (the monarchy initially, and later the business elites, incl the fascists) so it's not surprising that opposition to the church started with working class socialists. there's a fun line that the church used in a 'Hirtenbrief' (literally: shepherd letter) stating their relationship to the powerful: "we see in all elites, an image of the authority of god" ("wir sehen in jeder Obrigkeit einen Abglanz der Authoriät Gottes")
the main reason there is a north-south split in Europe, is because of the influence of the church, the more a country/culture liberated itself from catholicism, the more civilized a country became xD that's why Austria is the most backward country, compared to similar countries in Europe (similar means: relatively rich, and in the power sphere of Germany, so: the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, maybe one or two other..) we're more catholic xD
For those of you that don't attend a Synagogue, Church, or Mosque regularly, I see a lot of value in community-building in houses of worship that other organizations don't give. By attending a house of worship with the same people, you not only share community with those people, but a common belief. Having a common belief with others further gives you a community because you are both "in it together" and have all committed to share a similar lifestyle.
I've been in secular groups and religious groups. The secular groups I've been part of, there's never been a singular commitment to a specific lifestyle or specific belief system. Because of this lack of unity to lifestyle and commitment, I don't feel as connected or regular with other people in secular groups since we aren't as committed to seeing each other every week and we aren't committed to living the same kind of lifestyle.
With that being said, I'm not saying that you can't find common ground with other people in clubs, sports teams, work places, etc., but I'm just saying there's another level of community when you've both committed to live the same kind of belief system and lifestyle.
This is 100% my opinion. You are free to disagree.
I don't think anyone denies that churches and other houses of worship do provide a great sense of community. The issue (in my opinion of course) is everything else. It's the belief system itself. The one that causes LGBT people to have a hard time. The one that forces evolution to fight to be taught in schools. The one that constantly influences our politics and laws. That's what I don't like. The community is great, the beliefs are, IMO, less so.
People seek meaning in communities of belonging. Q-Anon is a contemporary example. Wild card events and social phenomena such as religious revivals do happen and I think it's uncertain whether current trends will continue indefinitely. The unreflective "nones" have these needs and thus are ripe pickings for charismatic leaders who offer connection and answers.
Why do Americans have such a fear of becoming like secular Europe?!
Is Europe such a bad place? Our inequality levels are quite low. Our global influence is high. Our civil rights record is quite decent today. Our economic record is good too. Europe is the richest and most happy continent in the whole world while lacking a lot of natural resources the US has.
So what are you scared of?
As an American half of us want to move to become more like you in some ways and the other half hates anything that isn't "American" in their eyes the same way the French do, but times like 1000 lol. Also fears of "sCaRy EuRo SoCiAlIsM" mind you that having a welfare state isn't socialist but most Americans couldn't give a shit what other countries say lol.
I've developed a model for why conservatives resist a social safety net so much, and it seems to bear out every time I apply it to what I observe in politics. Namely, the GOP doesn't want to give everyone free health care, because that would mean black people would get free healthcare. They don't want to provide paid parental leave for all because that would mean black people would get paid leave. They want free access to guns because, as one group of NRA supporters was overheard saying to each other, guns are what they need to defend themselves against black people. Seriously, take any political issue or vote, and watch how the GOP will always prioritize the policy that disfavors non-whites, even if it goes against principles or religious beliefs they've claimed to hold historically, and even if it goes against their own personal interests.
As long as these conservative whites can keep black people oppressed and impoverished, they can feel superior to them, even as the entire world outside of their conservative tribe calls them out for being morally backward, racist, and ignorant. It's one of the last things remaining to let them feel special and superior, and they will cut off their nose just to spite their face and stay racist. Every time.
Like ByeBye said, eveyone else in the US wants to be like Europe by a significant majority. But the way the electoral college and the senate is set up, though, about 30-40% of the country can block every single policy change that the rest of us would like to enact.
Agnostics aren't anti-religious :(
I'm curious about the agnostics-atheist ratio. Despite growing up Catholic I have never been very religious, and have never felt it as a significant force/institution influencing my life. My best friend is Jewish, and I feel like for both of us it is more like cultural window dressing, quaint and folksy.
Over the decades I’ve become less and less a ‘believer’. At the age of 73, I am nw an atheist.
lol at 7:03 I thought he was taking about nuns
Goodwill, Doctors Without Borders and UNICEF are already filling “the gap” in social services mentioned. And there will be more secular organizations in the future - not only from the public, but the private sector as well, as religion loses its structure and membership.
Misinformation is not only spread by a lack of organization and rules, it is also spread by organized institutions with a great many rules (such as religious ones). I understand that you might be worried about change, but your focus should be on finding a better boat rather than trying to fix one that is filled with holes and sinking.
The best episodes don't have Nate Silver.
The true religion in this country is guns. Worshippers covet them, caress them, cling to them. Their faith in hot lead exceeds any other deity.
Regarding social services, what about mutual aid? Several non-religious organizations/movements like BLM or Occupy Wall Street have managed to organize around this, at least for some time.
It's not really that catholicism is very left-wing, it is more left-wing on welfare, but very right-wing on issues such as abortion or homosexuality. The Republican party is so far-right on issues of taxation and welfare that it puts off a lot of catholics used to some idea of a welfare state, but I still suspect that catholic heritage is more of a correlation than a causal link. It probably correlates to migration patterns and the degree to which they've been aggressively evangelized by US evangelical preachers.