The North looks ever more attractive — read this excellent article on the collapse of organized religion in Canada. The numbers of church members is simply plummeting up there, a state we can only dream of bringing to pass here in the US (numbers are declining here, too, but we can hope that this is an inevitable descent and that Canada is only leading us by a few years.)
One interesting hypothesis for why it’s happening is that we can thank, in part, feminism.
Women the traditional mainstays of institutional religion in huge numbers abruptly rejected the church’s patriarchal exemplar of them as chaste, submissive “angels in the house” with all of the social and moral responsibility for community and family but none of the authority.
Unable to find acceptable religious role models or religious ideals that were not painful or oppressive, they reconstructed their identities as secular and sexual beings.
As they progressed into university graduate and professional schools and entered the work force, their horizons broadened and they discovered ways of serving that were more valuable than doing dishes and running church picnics.
I don’t know how solid the data is on that claim, but it’s at least intuitively attractive. Mothers are typically far more influential on their children’s religious belief than fathers, at least in my experience, so anything that draws women away from the church is going to have strong effects.
Maybe if we want atheism to succeed, we need to promote women more. Everyone thinks of Dawkins, Dennett, Harris, and Hitchens when we discuss the godless movement — but perhaps we should be giving more props to Susan Jacoby, Julia Sweeney, Ellen Johnson, Natalie Angier, Margaret Downey, even Madelyn Murray O’Hair … hey, have you noticed? There are lots of actively atheist women!
I wouldn’t be surprised if it was true.
In the atheist group I run on campus, the bulk of the members are women. The bulk of the women would likely call themselves feminists. In fact, all four officers are women, including myself!
I found it amusing that in the group running guide I received from either CFI or the Secular Student Alliance had a section on “welcoming women” or how to attract them to the group. Was it formerly unheard of for women to be atheists?
I ran into one of my former students yesterday. She’s a women’s studies major and is taking “Feminist Theologies.” She whispered to me, “But I’m a hard core atheist so it’s hard not to roll my eyes and laugh.”
I think it’s the access to education.
We LIKE our women smart(better sex)
Not to mention it’s too cold to believe in hell.
peter
…and hot… let’s not forget atheist women are hot.
Speaking as a Canadian, I’m glad religion is losing its appeal. In the 60’s and 70’s during the Quiet Revolution in Quebec Church attendance in that province went from 90% plus to sub 20%. The rest of Canada is follow suit. If only now the politicians had the courage to get rid of state sponsered Catholic schools (a left over from Confederation) in all the provinces.
Sadly, the author of that article tripped and fell into the age-old “blame it on the feminists” trap in his argument.
The reasoning is actually quite weak, as it ignores a plethora of other factors that play into the mix.
…and Pmomma!
“…and hot… let’s not forget atheist women are hot.”
…and they put out on the first date! Ok ok just kidding
I think this is refreshing and encouraging news, PZ. Anecdotally, my wife and daughter went to our former mega-church in Apple Valley, MN for the music on xmas eve past and said it was almost empty…let’s praise and shout to jebus for this miracle of lost-faith!
Sadly, the author of that article tripped and fell into the age-old “blame it on the feminists” trap in his argument.
Why “Blame” why not “give credit for?”
When I teach gender I say that feminism is partially responsible for increasing divorce rates because it has provided women with greater opportunities for education and employment so they are not as trapped in bad marriages; it has led to changes in the law for how domestic violence is treated, which has also helped women escape; and a few other factors. One of the things I flat-out say is that part of the increase in divorce is positive and feminism deserves part of the credit for that.
More committed to what, superstition? And he sees a smaller zealot filled cult as preferential?
It is certainly a fact that women make the churches go as any trip to any church will show. The mothers bring the kids while dad goes fishing or something. Losing the mothers really kills a congregation. A church my mother in-law attends just did a ‘re masculinizing’ series as they felt the church was becoming to feminine. Not enough men where coming and the congregation was mostly female.
My female relatives where upset over this attempt and two now attend elsewhere.
There was this fellow who had a site called ‘the war on faith’ and he had a funny screed on being a woman and being Christian.
I’ve had this talk with my wife. She has told me a professor who said how pro woman the bible is but frankly I don’t see it.
I have to say this surprised me. Being from Alberta it seems like Creationists are coming out of the wood work. A “Creation Science” museum opened last year. But if this is true it sure makes me proud to be a Canadian Athiest Woman. Hopefully this is a trend that lasts.
This is flat out true. Not all divorce is bad and or terrible. What is terrible is the amount of lives wasted by people forced to remain in loveless and worse marriages.
Yes, many younger women have left the churches. They’ve also left many other organizations that depend heavily on volunteers, or moved to different kinds of organizations; it can be tough to find women who are free for after-school Girl Scout meetings, for example, though they may be volunteering somewhere on evenings or weekends.
It’s also a die-off, as the article noted. All those church-basement ladies who organized rummage sales and spaghetti suppers and funeral teas are getting old and dying, needing their diminishing circle of colleagues to organize their funeral teas.
Jeff,
you’ve likely already seen this Slate piece by Tim Harford, but if not, you might find it interesting. Rather than risk getting sucked into the black hole of PZ’s moderation queue again, I’ll just give you the URL to cut and paste:
http://www.slate.com/id/2182089/entry/2182091/
The religious profile of Canada is quite different from the US. Even Alberta has a lot of Anglicans, Catholics, Unyited Church compared to any of the southern states. The closest parallell I can find to Alberta in the US is Rhode Island.
So if Rhode Island represented the religious right in the US…
Let’s not forget Emma Goldman, eh?
Mrs. Tilton,
took a quick look. Nice complex analysis it seems, but it also seems that he wants to develop a model of economic activity (particularly the development of sexual divisions of labor) that treats gender as epiphenomenal (again–quick reading) rather than constitutive. I take a bit of issue with that.
This is totally true. As a Canadian woman, who ‘escaped’ from the Catholic church as a teenager I feel really lucky to be living in this country as opposed to the US. Sure alot of my family doesn’t really get why I don’t believe in god, no matter how hard I try to educate them, but I very rarely run into any real fundamentalist attitudes that appear to be so rampant in the US.
We sure aren’t perfect, because I still feel that most of our population believes in god, but it’s really quite passively in alot of cases – where people believe in god because everyone else does, and feel that evolution is too difficult to even think about. Here’s something that really made me smile lately though:
I am getting married in May, and since my fiance and I are definitely not the church marrying kind we have hired an officiant, who will perform any kind of ceremony you like. In discussing our options, and telling her that we want no christian content whatsoever, she said that of the people who use the services of her and the almost 100 officiants in her group that at least 85% of people want no mention of god in their ceremony. I was really surprised and happy to hear this!
We absolutely need more women being vocal about skepticism and non-belief. And we need more woman taking a public role in science and science education. Women will really change the dynamic in Canada and the U.S. in the future on these issues. More Skepchicks please!
Here are some figures for
Alberta and
Ontario
from the 2001 census. (Could not find the 2006 figures)
“If only now the politicians had the courage to get rid of state sponsered Catholic schools (a left over from Confederation) in all the provinces.”
I totally agree with this. I was raised in the Catholic school board in Ontario – I went to a catholic elementary and high school. I feel like I got totally ripped off as a child in terms of my education. I’m still annoyed that not only did I have to spend precious time learning about religion every year (and going to church with my classmates once a month), when I could have been learning about something more useful and interesting to me, but I wasn’t even allowed to be taught anything about evolution. I heard NOTHING about it. I was always really interested in science and this subject was just not a priority next to religion and creationism, etc. Ridiculous. I was totally confused as a child, because any of the ‘teachings of the church’ that they rammed down our throats made no sense to me, but we weren’t allowed to question it or even ask for further clarification. I just feel that I got ripped off, and unfortunately tons of kids are still shoved into this school system, alot of times even if the parents aren’t sure they believe in it themselves.
I feel like one of our biggest problems here in Canada is that even though the number of people who don’t really believe in religious values and teachings is increasing, alot of these people don’t take that extra step to really think about how they feel about the world and what they should be teaching to their children. Think for yourselves people!
In light of PZ’s invocation of Julia Sweeney, I want to reiterate that I think she’s fabulous. As I wrote in this space in October:
Well, it’s three months later now, and still no Letting Go of God (nor release date for same). I’m getting antsy.
All the more reason: Swee-ney! Swee-ney! Swee-ney!
Two other influential atheist women are Anne Nichol Gaylor and her daughter Annie Laurie Gaylor of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, which is a powerful Atheist rights organization (it does a great job of defending and promoting separation of church and state through lawsuits citing the First and Fourteenth Ammendments to the US Constitution).
Heh, heh. I’ve been blabbing about this for years. In the 1960’s the non-religious were self-identified at just a few percent in my parents generation. By the time my generation settled down and got married it was about 10% of the individuals, depending on what you read. In our children’s generation, it’s about 20%, depending on what you read, and the composite rate for all generations is at about 10%-15%.
Even more important is the growth of the “unchurhed.” There are different definitions of the term, one definition is people who still call themselves “Christian” but don’t attend church. Here Christianity is also failing. From 1991 to 2004 the “unchurched” part of the population has increased from 39 million to 75 million (92% increase) according to a survey done the Barna Group.
Another definition is people with “no religion” but don’t necessarily call themselves agnostic or atheist. At this point in time, people who self-declare as “no religion” are now 14% of the nation. This is up 75% from 1990.
Today, the most religious state is North Dakota with just 3% claiming no religion. The most liberal state is, surprise, Washington State where 25% claim no religion.
A corollary to this is the reactive growth of Charismatic Churches. Membership in those kinds of churches has grown to 80 million members in the US. This is the group that is most hostile to women’s rights, including abortion, contraception, equal pay, etc. So, while religion is failing in the United States, in it’s death throws it is radicalizing. So we are not out of the woods, yet.
Kathy Griffin is a pretty cool female atheist.
Don’t forget Sara Silverman. Rrrowrrr.
Yes, please let us encourage women who are not in the
position of Ellen Johnson and others of note to get out
there and become known to us and the god worshipers.
I know Ellen Johnson, and am particularly honored to have
known Madalyn Murray O’Hair. What an experience to talk
with her, She was brilliant and unequivocally intransigent
in debating the religious rabble. She may have been caustic
with profanities and forceful intrusions while the insane
were ranting, but that did not detract from her incredible
knowledge to put her rationality across to the religiously
deranged. I was with her for several conventions and was
always assured a spot next to her in various situations to
revel in her intelligence. What a horrible shame to come to
such a demise, murdered by criminals, one of whom was a
member of the Atheist Organization. We will never have her
like and intellect again. I will always cherish those
memories with her, and considered it a privilege to be
able to discuss the situations we are now embroiled in at
an ever-demeaning rate. I often wonder how she would
handle the likes of D’Souza, Huckabee, Paul, and all the
other deranged rabble. I still think she would be all the
more formidible of this current crop of crap.
paulo1, it think it’ll still be awhile before they’ll release the data on religious affiliation from the 2006 census.(http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census/index.cfm)
I wonder how many Canadians who affiliate themselves with a religion are actually soft athiests, agnostics, or new-agey pantheists.
Even here in Alberta (well, that liberal island called Edmonton), I know quite a few who still consider themselves to be Muslim or Christian due to their upbringing, and yet hold very little to their respective churchs’ doctrines.
LisaJ, your experience of the catholic school system is a little different than mine. I went to a public elementary school but a catholic highschool based on the recommendation of my grade 8 teacher (the local public highschool was really, really crappy and I’m not above abusing the system). Yes, we wasted a lot of time with morning prayer crap, and had two required religion classes that were a large waste of time, and yes, we had monthly masses. But we did study a evolution in my school to a certain extent (no mention of common descent, but lots of genetics and natural selection). And overall the quality of the school was much higher than the public alternative. Of course, the correct course of action would be to improve the public schools.
Richard,
You better copyright Skepchick quick before someone steals it.
-a proud skepchick!
Ha, Canada is just like Europe! :)
Sarah Silverman an atheist?
Hello, she totally slept with him.
King Aardvark, that’s great to hear that you had a better experience than I did. I do know of many cases like yours actually where non catholic students have gone to a catholic high school at some point, because it promised a better education. It is true that, at least in Ontario where I’m from, the catholic school system offers an overall better education than the public school system. I do agree that where our government really should be spending our money is in improving the quality of education in the public school board.
I am glad to hear that perhaps not all catholic schools in Canada keep their students so disillusioned in terms of religion vs science. The furthest we got in terms of genetics in all of high school was learning the process of mitosis (for 3 years in a row!), not even the whole cell cycle (don’t even ask about meiosis, haha, no sex talk here). Where did you go to school? Ontario as well?
Please let’s not forget Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Her book is fantastic and very inspirational.
I’ve heard that the percentage of non believers in my city is 22% (a bit higher than the national average). I can’t imagine what that means the percentage on campus alone is.
music to my ears.
….BDM in that “atheist conversion” thread wondered when we would move on to the second step, and what that would look like…
I’d say when people stop supporting organized religion simply because it means nothing to them, that would be “step 2”.
Canada makes me ashamed to be an American.
Another great post, PZ, and a reasonably good article too (for the Globe and Mail, at least). As one of the younger generation, I can see how and why Canada’s churches are in decline, it’s pretty damn uncool to hang around a bunch of mysognistic, sexually repressed and homophobic old white guys ranting about how gay marriage = the end of all that is. The majority of young Canadians appear to be comfortable with women working outside of the home, with gay people getting married, and having sex outside of marriage, so anyone arguing to the contrary is undoubtedly going to feel the pinch.
As a matter of fact, I had recently just written an article for Trent University’s Absynthe Magazine (www.absynthe.ca) on this very issue, namely, the fact that Christianity seems to have devolved into a pack of bloodthirsty authoritarian pricks isn’t helping them in the long run, and will only serve to damage the prospects of the faith unless they start acting with honour and dignity for once.
I ended up getting this two-page response from one Christian would ended up dancing around the entire issue and quoting random Bible verses in order to justify his rather scattered argument. Getting back to the point at hand, one of his excuses for Christianity’s behaviour was that 77% of Canadians identify themselves as Christian. Now, I haven’t really looked it up, so I’m not sure if what he’s saying is true or not, but even if it is, it’s a figure of the current population. Nothing he wrote throughout the course of his article suggested that this was in any way going to preserve Christianity in the future. So what if 77% of Canadians call themselves Christian? The way things are going, and the seemingly oblivious attitude of Christians to the problems in their own house (as exemplified by the guy who responded to my article), that figure’s going to shrink PDQ.
But to be frank, I can’t shed many tears for Christianity in Canada, and this most recent news gives me something to cheer. The faith hasn’t done much to benefit Canada in recent memory, and this decline means that more Canadians will have a better chance of growing up into rational and enlightened human beings with the capacity for critical thought. Hopefully, the realisation that nothing lasts forever will help Canada’s Christians in getting off their high horses and actually doing something productive and positive for once.
P.S. Unfortunately, due to some technical snafus, the most recent issues of the Absynthe haven’t been placed up on the site, so I won’t be able to link to the article in question. Hopefully, that’ll change, and then I can link it, if anyone’s interested.
I’m Canadian. Like one of the other posters here I went
through the Separate school system in Ontario. I remain a somewhat wishy-washy Catholic. Upon reading the linked article I found myself feeling sad, as though something were being lost…
Then I realized that I was regretting the disappearance of
community that was once provided by these failing churches. That got me wondering if anybody has considered a replacement social model – a way of continuing to use those church buildings in a socially positive and financially feasible approach – sort of like a diluted unitarian church, that would allow people to feel spiritual if they wished, but that would encourage learning about what is “Really Going On” in the world.
Is there room for a post-religous social community in the former church parishes? Would you return to the church in which you were born to have a communal supper and/or watch Fahrenheit 911?
MAJeff:
the Canadian government’s response:
Canada isn’t quite “there” yet, unfortunately.
not surprising, given the petty responses of the Bush administration to other criticisms leveled at it by other countries.
I’m sure Bush was just sitting there, pen in hand, waiting to sign a resolution invoking economic “sanctions” (read: illegal economic penalties) if the Canadian government in any way publicly endorsed that document as being representative of Canadian foreign policy.
That got me wondering if anybody has considered a replacement social model – a way of continuing to use those church buildings in a socially positive and financially feasible approach – sort of like a diluted unitarian church, that would allow people to feel spiritual if they wished, but that would encourage learning about what is “Really Going On” in the world.
if not, why not get involved and start one?
no need to feel loss, if you can encourage a suitable secular replacement.
just the process of trying would be worthwhile, don’t you think?
Canada isn’t quite “there” yet, unfortunately.
I’m no less ashamed. We’re known around the world as a nation that tortures. We allow cities to be obliterated, bridges to simply collapse. We invade nations that are no threat to us, and uphold regimes that violate the human rights of women (shit, they’re the only regimes we can get to agree with us at certain UN conventions)…..
I’m no less ashamed.
fair enough. I really meant to point out another thing I was ashamed about:
punitive sanctions applied to entire countries for simply disagreeing with our current administration’s policy decisions.
as the saying goes:
Worst – President – Ever
If Canada is so post-religious, then why is Mark Steyn being prosecuted for criticizing Islam?
http://www.economist.com/world/la/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10499144
Isn’t what is being unsaid here is that we assume fewer woman than men to be nontheistic because women seem to be the primary churchgoers or is there a more pernicious myth that women buy into belief systems more readily (i.e. women are less logical and more emotional than men)?
The funny thing is that Xian men seem to be the most rabidly illogical publicly, excepting Coulter of course.
Is it also because we have the unflatteringly abrasive M. M. O’Hare as the archetypical representitive for female atheism? Dworkin was the face of (radical) feminism and O’Hare and Dworkin seem to raise a similar requisite of hackles to supporters and nonsupporters alike over their respective causes.
Trying to establish a new postergirl (woman) as attractive or “hawt” is problematic because of the implied chauvenism, although I do think Julia Sweeney is awfully cute.
BTW, “Skepchick” is already taken by a wonderful blogger; check her out.
Yay for Canatheist women!
(I’ll just duck and cover now)
seriously, I hope someday, years from now, when people think “W” they will associate it with starting the phrase, Worst President Ever.
Worst – President – Ever
I’ll drink to that. I guess that means it’s time to head to the liquor store and grab a bottle of wine…French maybe.
When is this ever not true? To echo a couple of posters above, if any movement is to succeed, it needs to address the imbalance of power (sexual dimorphism?) that is likely apparent in it.
This also applies to other marginalized groups. Having a bunch of White Men as the sole promoters of any philosophy – especially minority views – hurts the cause.
If Canada is so post-religious, then why is Mark Steyn being prosecuted for criticizing Islam?
irrelevant to what the article was examining, if you would bother to read it instead of trolling some bait.
@12 re: creationists coming out of the woodwork. Could be they feel threatened, hence the louder noises. The fewer of them there are, the more strident they become.
I’ll drink to that. I guess that means it’s time to head to the liquor store and grab a bottle of wine…French maybe.
too early for gin and tonics?
damn.
The fewer of them there are, the more strident they become.
yup.
and the “moderate” (?) ones will be filtered out, leaving the more extreme (and dangerous) ones.
LisaJ, at the time, I was in southeastern Ontario. Wow, you guys didn’t even go over the whole cell cycle? We did that in grade 11.
too early for gin and tonics?
Never! I just prefer wine, and the Amstel Lights in the fridge just aren’t appealing at the moment.
And my favorite: Emma Goldman.
Sorry you saw my comment as troll bait. Also sorry for not going with the flow and nodding my head with the rest of the congregation. Plenty of comments here that have nothing to do with the OP, but as long as they don’t question the “america bad – rest of world good” orthodoxy then I guess they are acceptable. Believe it or not, there are those of us who are disgusted with the current administration, don’t believe in god, and are still proud to be americans. Am I surprised that my comment was dismissed out of hand? Not really. This is the same elitist attitude that pervades other atheist forums.
Any list of kick-ass female atheists would be incomplete without a mention of Ruth Hurmence Green, author of The Born Again Skeptic’s Guide to the Bible:
King, small world. I went to school and grew up in Barrie, and then I went to University in London and now Ottawa. Not too far from where you would have been.
Yes, my biology class was pretty weak – but now as a PhD student I am studying the Rb/E2F cell cycle regulatory pathway in neural development and stem cell regulation. I am making up for it now, dammit!
Icthyic @#54: (shrug) Sure, and they’ll have less cover. It’s not as if the more extreme and dangerous ones aren’t there now. (Maybe that’s what you meant? If so, my apologies; blame the Darvocet.)
NC @ #41:
Sure. This time the men get to do the work: get the kids up and dressed and off to Social, clean up the room and put flowers on the stage, make the coffee and cookies and the email list/phone tree… In terms of work rather than ownership, it clearly wasn’t “the failing churches” that made the community; it was the women. Atlas is shrugging, heh; there’s just this one detail that certain blowhards including the author of that epithet failed to notice about her.
Sorry you saw my comment as troll bait. Also sorry for not going with the flow and nodding my head with the rest of the congregation. Plenty of comments here that have nothing to do with the OP, but as long as they don’t question the “america bad – rest of world good” orthodoxy then I guess they are acceptable. Believe it or not, there are those of us who are disgusted with the current administration, don’t believe in god, and are still proud to be americans. Am I surprised that my comment was dismissed out of hand? Not really. This is the same elitist attitude that pervades other atheist forums.
It was the “elitist” that gave me BINGO!
Off topic: Behe on kkms right now. Can listen at kkms.com, and please call in if you have a good question for him–number at site.
Hey King Aardvark and LisaJ, we should start a support group. “Adult Atheist Survivors of Catholic School.”
My experience (in California, not Canada) was remarkably similar to yours, King A. I was from an agnostic family (protestant in origin) but went to a Catholic high school because it was supposed to be better academically. I had to sit through four years of stupid religion classes, plus the occasional Mass and retreat (if I have to listen to “Bridge Over Troubled Water” one more time…)
but the science education there was pretty good. My bio teacher started the unit by saying, “I believe that evolution happened…and that God guided the process.” I didn’t happen to agree, of course, but believers like him I don’t mind sharing a planet with.
I was also pleasantly surprised, after having grown up listening to my fundie grandparents insisting that anyone who wasn’t “saved” was going to burn in hell, to hear the Catholics say things like, “We believe that Hindus and Muslims and Jews and Buddhists are finding God in their own way.”
Of course, I still think the catholic church is one of the most disgusting, woman- and sex-hating, homophobic, murderous institutions on earth. And now the new pope is a creationist. Pleh.
#12: Ah Alberta the little Texas of the north. Beef [check], oil [check], inbred conservative religious hillbilly halfwits [check], guns and big hats […coming soon?]. I spent a week in Calgary and was amazed at all the cowboy bars offering topless bronco bullriding line dancing nights and such.
It’s not as if the more extreme and dangerous ones aren’t there now. (Maybe that’s what you meant?
yup.
Also sorry for not going with the flow and nodding my head with the rest of the congregation.
saying such is a good way to get the rest of us to ignore you completely.
nicely done.
we should start a support group. “Adult Atheist Survivors of Catholic School.”
Great idea! It’s nice to know that there are others out there who understand :)
Ok – i get the hint – I’ll keep my subversion to myself. I love this site – really enjoy reading PZ’s commentary. Thought I’d throw in my $.02 and maybe get a little discussion going. To me, 50 posts of “i agree” is not particularly compelling. It’s really frustrating to me that my opinions have no home. Apparently I’m not enough of a dogmatist in any direction for my words to be worth discussing, on the right or the left. I honestly wish all of us here the best – I’m not at all interested in pissing in the public pool. I only wish you would occasionally entertain the possibility that you are alienating people who should be on the same side. I live in Texas, for fuck’s sake – religion is a fucking buzzsaw to free-thinkers in this state. No need to respond to this – I concede and will revert to lurker status.
Women who write articles like this don’t make me feel to encouraged: http://www.palmbeachpost.com/accent/content/accent/epaper/2008/01/18/a3e_gushee_sub_0118.html
Because it’s not related. Those are HATE SPEECH LAWS that are having unforeseen consequences and it could include, from what I understand, it could be race, religion or gender.
It’s really frustrating to me that my opinions have no home.
tiny violin.
no, wait, not even that.
you could have, instead, gone into exactly WHY you thought the issue you put forward was in any way relevant to the discussion of the xian institutions disintegrating in Canada.
this is a fact. the article was examining various theories put forward to try and explain it.
did you even bother to consider that what you posted was simply not relevant to the issue at hand?
of course not, you, in your own words, were shopping for a home for your ideas.
you know what we call that?
trolling.
so tired of trolls playing the victim.
Don’t be slapping Canada on the back too hard!
The G&M article provides the same info on church participation as any any one can find out by going to the Stats Canada site.
However many of Canada’s media ignore the facts. The CBC is forever trying to fan the flames of religion with its shows like “Tapestry” ad its recent special on the Role of Religion in Your Life.
Here in Calgary, with a +23% “No Religion” response on the census, the local paper reads more like a door to door tract and the City staff mock folks who object to tax money being spent on a manger scene in City Hall. Even the Health Authority has hired a spiritual advisor instead of doctors, nurses or maintenance staff.
Your being wrong doesn’t make us elitist. It just makes you wrong.
Chip, if you feel this site is too much of a lefty-liberal yes-fest, then grow a thicker skin and get into it. You’re going to get called on your comments (as almost everyone here has been at numerous point) and you’ll have plenty of opportunity to defend them.
I’m loathe to call trolling after one comment, but Ichythic’s comment suggesting you be a little more specific in your claims is good advice. If you’ve lurked here long enough, you’ll know we get danced around by concern trolls often enough that we’ve become a little touchy.
And so what if the majority of us feel the same way about most issues? What do you want us to do about it? Should I disagree with MAJeff about the US’ use of torture just to avoid sounding PC? Is that really better? Faux dissent for the sake of dissent isn’t critical thinking; it’s a newspaper op-ed page.
If you are honestly concerned and want your opinions heard, then the exact wrong thing to do is lick your wounds and go back to lurking.
I for one am interested in what you’ve got to say, as long as you can reasonably defend your points with evidence.
I’ve often heard that the best investment you can make in developing countries, is in the education of its women. Seein’ as how the US is still a developing nation in regards to its religious views, it makes sense that they could be the leaders for progress in that sense too.
Let’s not forget to celebrate my favorite female atheist: Barbara Forrest.
She’s the best!
The importance of mothers: if mothers do not teach their children that the Bible is the holy truth, they are unlikely to be interested of their own accord and even less so to believe it. If mothers do not teach their children that there is a monotheistic God, they are unlikely to infer such an existence from nature. They may well infer that there are fairies (very attractive concept visually and found in some form in many cultures), they may infer that animals have souls like people, they may infer imaginary friends. These are all part and parcel of the human psyche that includes archetypal images. All pretty normal and unlikely to lead to negative self image or abusive behaviors towards others.
On the other hand, mothers can effectively teach their children to examine all information presented and to never accept something as true just because someone else said so. (The answer to the famous “But Joey told me to do it” whine.) As more women refuse to accept patriarchal answers because they have the freedom to do so and the independence to be able to support themselves, less of the religious viewpoint is likely to be passed on. Neither of my children grew up being taught that the Bible was truth (in fact I don’t think either of them have even read it) and you can believe that they will not be passing a belief in the monotheistic God on to their children. My daughter went to a church with school friends for a while when she was about 13 but was soon turned off by the controlling behaviors. (She is 21 now.) I ‘m not saying they might not pass on a belief in Coyote but that is a bit different to passing on allegiance to a church.
On the other hand, the security assessment that was posted on this site last week seems to accept the idea that the huge disruptions of climate change will drive people back to embracing religious beliefs, presumably from a feeling of personal helplessness. One can only wait and see but I can’t think of anything more useless for dealing with the future than a belief it is all in the hands of a God who is really benevolent even when the world he created is malevolent. So I guess we will see if orthodox religion has any adaptive value or not.
That’s the good news but a recent Ipsos Reid poll states that 66% of Canadians believe in angels and 48% in ghosts.(There’s a difference?) 9% believe their own houses have been visited. More worrisome is that the younger people questioned were more likely to believe in ghosts than older people. On a better note, I was listening to a noontime phone-in talk show today which was about angels. The only two callers that I heard said they didn’t believe in them and that they were atheists.
But we’re all going to have dirty dishes and no picnics??
Plus, no Catholic girls to corrupt? (ahhh. . . fun, fun. . . you guys who think atheist girls are easier never lived next to an all-girls Catholic school).
Well, I guess it’s worth it to promote the diminution of absolute lunacy in the world.
I wearied long ago of looking to the patriarchy for my answers. They seemed too self serving, and not concerned a wit about what I thought.
I recently came out as an atheist to my women friends and acquaintances, and was pleasantly surprised when many of them smiled and revealed, they too, were atheists. How about that? Maybe the trend is heading south.
That’s the good news but a recent Ipsos Reid poll states that 66% of Canadians believe in angels and 48% in ghosts.(There’s a difference?) 9% believe their own houses have been visited. More worrisome is that the younger people questioned were more likely to believe in ghosts than older people.
could indicate a less than drastic reduction in credibility given to superstitious nonsense, but still showing a greater rejection of the institutionalization of it.
IOW, a rejection of organized religion in favor of “freedom of personal superstition”?
even if that’s what it is, it’s still a healthier direction for the future than support for institutionalized insanity.
I live in the southern US where its not uncommon to be asked “what church do you go to?”
I reply “I don’t, I don’t believe in the supernatural.”
This is quite fun because most Christians would count silly stuff like palm reading and ghosts as supernatural claptrap, without admitting that their beliefs are in a supernatural being. This is much more fun than saying “I don’t believe in god.”
I’m so happy that I moved to Canada four years ago. Canada is not perfect — plenty of problems exist. But here I can tell a stranger that I’m not a believer and no one bats an eye.
The majority of Canadians think peace-keeping and helping the poor are good ideas, not evil plots. They think tolerance is a virtue. Injustices happen, but they’re not accepted as “well, that just how things are.”
And the best thing about Canadians? Mostly they really, really don’t want Canada to be like America.
That gives me hope.
Why aren’t there New Atheist women bloggers? Sighs.
Why aren’t there New Atheist women bloggers? Sighs.
um, there are.
check the blogroll link at the top of the page.
here’s one which I have enjoyed perusing from time to time:
http://gretachristina.typepad.com/greta_christinas_weblog/
…and this was the post that drew my interest:
http://gretachristina.typepad.com/greta_christinas_weblog/2007/03/defending_the_b.html
Jsn #47 wrote:
My understanding is that surveys have shown that, statistically speaking, women do believe in almost every form of the supernatural and paranormal more than men do (one of the exceptions, I think, is space aliens.) I also think that the “myth” that women are less logical and more emotional than men is being spread as much by women as men. Some feminists are into “difference feminism” — celebrating women’s special connections to their intuitions and the like. In my own circle, fundamentalist religions are frowned on by the other women — not because they’re too superstitious, but because they’re too “judgmental.”
My own rule of thumb is that if any event is labeled as being “For Women” it’s probably going to be filled with woo, pseudoscience, and crap for the gullible. A lot of women seem to feel that there’s prestige in being “open minded” and “spiritual.” How wonderful that you believe in angels! Atheism — no, that’s too judgmental.
But women are getting more active in skepticism, and less apologetic for being rational at the expense of seeming less sensitive. The atheist/humanist/skeptic groups used to be primarily male, and old. Now it’s more general. I blame the internet.
Wow, 35% of BC citizens declare “no religion”!
Another place to put on the list to visit. It sounds very enlightened.
MAJeff @18,
well, you think about this sort of thing for a living, whereas I mostly don’t think about it at all. But I had the impression that Harford, through his reading of Becker, was quite openly dodging the question whether gender is epiphenomenal, constitutive or anything else — those are valid questions for other disciplines (or so I am reading him) but he is an economist and hence will deal with the economic effect of the phenomenon, not its underlying cause or meaning.
Anyway, I suspected that he might not be entirely on your wavelength, but was struck by the overlap between the two of you on a core idea. Namely (and though any individual divorce might be traumatically awful for the woman), the ready availability of divorce nonetheless has had a net positive effect.
the ready availability of divorce nonetheless has had a net positive effect.
Absolutely. And when people scream, “Won’t someone think of the children!” I remind them that it’s actually better for kids to split time between two happy homes than to live full-time in a miserable, hate-filled home.
All is not so rosy up north:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/01/13/hate_speech_laws/index.html
Oh noes! The ‘elites’ are hostile to religion! Momeeeee!!!
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/347905_faith19.html
Articles Of Faith: ‘Elite’ fail to grasp breadth of religion[‘s insanity]
there, that’s a little more accurate, anyway.
I’m so proud to be a Canadian Atheist. Here is Montreal, churches are closing, convents are being turned into condos and colleges. The huge Catholic churches are largely empty with no money for upkeep. Over the last few decades three United Church congregations have merged into one and the unused buildings were sold, one to the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts and one to a private boy’s school. It brings joy to my heart I can tell you.
I am old enough to remember when the Catholic church ruled Quebec with an iron fist and were responsible for Catholic public schools. The Catholic schools were far inferior to the Protestant public system. Students who were having trouble getting good enough grades in the Protestant schools for University entrance, routinely would switch to the Catholic system even though they had to pay extra fees.
The exams were much easier the marks much higher (as much as 10%). Unfortunately, this made the transition to University quite difficult and the first year grades could be easily predicated. In addition, in the rural areas there were many who did not get even a rudimentary education and were functionally illiterate. I will give credit, however, to the private Jesuit Schools for elite males. They did provide a rigorous education. The girls were not so lucky at their convent schools, which were mediocre at best.
Here is Montreal
still great underground blues/jazz happening there?
haven’t visited for about 10 years now, but when I was there, I spent many late nights perusing the local pubs.
great city.
Both attitudes are stupid. If you are proud or ashamed of something you have had no part in creating, think again. Surely you don’t really actually think I should be proud of having been born in Austria!?! For example, Ichthyic, you didn’t even try to vote for Fearless Flightsuit.
Both attitudes are stupid. If you are proud or ashamed of something you have had no part in creating, think again. Surely you don’t really actually think I should be proud of having been born in Austria!?! For example, Ichthyic, you didn’t even try to vote for Fearless Flightsuit.
Forgot to mention…
Nope. He merely maintains that the soul has been created, and that the body has arisen through theistic evolution. The guy who has fallen for the Disinformation Institute is Cardinal Schönborn.
Forgot to mention…
Nope. He merely maintains that the soul has been created, and that the body has arisen through theistic evolution. The guy who has fallen for the Disinformation Institute is Cardinal Schönborn.
Yet, atheist women still find an excuse to spend up large at christmas.
I don’t have detailed statistics for religious beliefs and practices, its evolution and segmentation (sex, age,…) for CANADA, but I do have them for FRANCE (which is btw, probably the country with the largest atheist/agnostic population in Europe (ex russialarge country in the world).
Check this french atheist which has a summary of many different polls on the matter, very detailed for France and many comparisons with the rest of the world.
http://atheisme.free.fr/Religion/Statistiques_religieuses.htm
It’s in French, but here are a few pointers in English :
First, Women and atheism (the subject of this thread, I guess) :
On a first degree, it looks as if, in France, the data do not show that French women are more atheist/agnostic than men :
CSA 2004
Identify with a religion 73% M 69% F 76%
Do not identify with any 27% M 31% F 24%
(Evolution of “No religion” 1994 23%, 2007 31%)
But then, one has to consider another information, more curious, which is that only 58% of French people (and only 52% of those who declare themselves as “catholics”) consider the existence of God to be certain or probable. The rest consider it to be unlikely or do not believe in God.
It would be interesting to see what is the proportion of women/men who consider themselves catholics but do not believe in God.
Also, I’d be interested to know what are the % in the USA and Canada for these questions :
% who believe in Life after Death : France 43% Europe 53%
% who believe that religion is necessary in order to distinguish Good from Bad : France 24% Europe 43%
A government spokesman said the manual did not reflect the views of Canada, which is an ally of the US and Israel.
“The training manual is not a policy document and does not reflect the views or policies of this government,” said a spokesman for Foreign Minister Maxime Bernier.
Yeah, they kind of have to say that to stop the Bushites from nuking us, but the manual will be used, and everyone will know it.
Most Americans don’t realize that Canadians have been arrested without cause and tortured by the U.S. government. These cases make headlines in Canada day after day, but they’re never mentioned in the U.S. except for maybe magazines like The Nation or Utne Reader.
Mark Steyn is being “persecuted” for being a huge douche, which he completely deserves.
In all fairness, I suppose we Canucks should let you in on a little secret: we’re actually all religious animists. The god we worship is the weather, and requires almost daily supplication to be appeased.
Our prayers are simple, but we’ve got a different one for nearly every occasion: “Phew, it’s hot today, eh?” is used sometime around mid-July, and “Man, it’s cold today, eh?” for every other day.
Our theology is robust (“Yeah, but at least it’s a dry cold”) and our rituals require all sorts of paraphernalia and costumes, from parkas and car scrapers to citronella candles and wool-socked Birkenstocks.
We’re pretty relaxed about how often one observes their faith, but we will look askance at you if you fail to join us in a convivial prayer (say, at a bus stop or in an elevator.)
I know this will make some of you more atheistic types a little uncomfortable, but a simple statement of faith (“Oof, that wind chill is something, eh?”) will allow you to blend in without any trouble.
(There is a minor cargo cult here in Edmonton revolving around a deity we believe visited our city in the 80s called Thestanleycup and whom we hope will return in glory through the intercession of our priesthood, the Edmontonoilers, but it’s probably of no interest to anyone but anthropologists.)
From the Guardian (UK), August 2006:
“There have been growing signs the Pope is considering aligning his church more closely with the theory of “intelligent design” taught in some US states. Advocates of the theory argue that some features of the universe and nature are so complex that they must have been designed by a higher intelligence. Critics say it is a disguise for creationism.”
OK, I was using hyperbole when I called him a “creationist,” but His Ratziness is definitely moving in the direction of ID at the very least, and is proving to be more anti-science than his predecessor. Scary thought.
(There is a minor cargo cult here in Edmonton revolving around a deity we believe visited our city in the 80s called Thestanleycup and whom we hope will return in glory through the intercession of our priesthood, the Edmontonoilers, but it’s probably of no interest to anyone but anthropologists.)
won’t that require the reincarnation of St. Waynegretzky?
This ties in with my last experience in a normal church service (not a wedding or a funeral), about 25 years ago. The subject of the sermon was that men needed their “boys night out” events, because women could meet their female friends any time (frex they could get together for coffee in the morning, because of course none of them were working outside the home), but the men worked all day, and needed to be able to reconnect with their buddies in the evening.
I wasn’t much of a feminist back then, but the sermon sure helped to make me more of one, although I’m pretty sure that wasn’t the intent, It also didn’t do much to convince me that church-going would do anything for me, and about then I became a for-sure atheist. rather than just confused.
Alberta may be Texas, but that would make Edmonton map to Austin. Certainly, Edmonton is liberal enough that every time they re-do political boundaries, they group more city outskirts with as many farmers as possible, to dilute the influence of us irreligious city-slickers.
For example, Ichthyic, you didn’t even try to vote for Fearless Flightsuit.
my intent was directly countered by my own father, who voted for the WPE not once but twice.
fortunately, I can at least say i spent many hours trying to convince him otherwise, even to the point of printing out many articles documenting his inanities for him to read.
in the first election of the WPE, he claimed he simply couldn’t vote for someone named “Gore”.
in the second, he fell for the swiftboater arguments in their entirety, despite any evidence I presented to the contrary.
it is only now, 3 years into the second term of the WPE, that he finally has realized his error and regrets it. Even to the point of completely agreeing with me that he is the WPE.
I’m still sure he will vote republican in the next election.
(There is a minor cargo cult here in Edmonton revolving around a deity we believe visited our city in the 80s called Thestanleycup and whom we hope will return in glory through the intercession of our priesthood, the Edmontonoilers, but it’s probably of no interest to anyone but anthropologists.)
Brownian, I got to touch Theslanleycup on one of its visits. How many other believers get to touch their god? That makes ours real and the others, not so much.
it is only now, 3 years into the second term of the WPE, that he finally has realized his error and regrets it. Even to the point of completely agreeing with me that he is the WPE.
I’m still sure he will vote republican in the next election.
My dad used to be a Republican; even voted for Reagan. (Clinton 1996 was the first time he voted D.) He claims the Rs have moved away from him (which they have) but one doesn’t go from being a Reagan voter to an Edwards one without moving a little one’s self.
Before the second election of WPE, he was sitting around with some relatives, and they were yacking about the anti-christ and end times (I come from crazy people). Dad says, “The anti-christ is already here.”
All the Iowa Dutch fundies are like, “Wha?”
Dad: “He’s in the White House.”
the theory of “intelligent design” taught in some US states.
one, there is no scientific theory of intelligent design
which is why:
two, it actually ISN’T taught in ANY US state.
sometimes the Guardian forgets itself.
My dad used to be a Republican; even voted for Reagan.
*sigh*
admission time:
I too, voted for Reagan in the very first presidential election i could ever legally vote in (second term). I rationalized this as thinking that only Reagan could undo the damage Reagan had done in his first term.
he taught me better than to vote neocon in the future though.
been a democrat ever since.
I liken it as saying that the bible is the main thing that convinces people to be atheists.
similar reasoning.
Just to follow up on my previous post, I think that it is most likely that in the Low Countries, France, the UK and Germany, Atheist and Agnostics will represent the MAJORITY of the population within the next 10 to 15 years.
In my view, the most important factor which has to be analysed is the apparent immunity of these countries to the “born again” phenomenon which has precipitated so many Americans into un-reason..
We didn’t resist that well to McDonald’s and Windows, but we did resist somehow to these other great American inventions that have been the Evangelicals, the Latter-day saints and Scientology.
I too, voted for Reagan in the very first presidential election i could ever legally vote in (second term). I rationalized this as thinking that only Reagan could undo the damage Reagan had done in his first term.
I didn’t vote for President the first time I was eligible (1988). My absentee ballot arrived the day after the election.
What about Eugenie Scott?
Is she an atheist?
If not, why the hell not?
Another proud Canadian atheist here. One thought on the word “unchurched.” To me, it suggests someone lacking something. I’ve certainly heard church groups use it that way – to them, the unchurched are a market in need of their (bogus) product. In reference to myself, I prefer “church free.”
Ichtyic,
“I liken it as saying that the bible is the main thing that convinces people to be atheists.”
I have to make a remark : it’s not the Bible per say, but the statement which too often goes with it : “this is the word of God”.
I was told : here’s a book that tells you what people used to believe. So I never had a beef with the Bible.
(There is a minor cargo cult here in Edmonton revolving around a deity we believe visited our city in the 80s called Thestanleycup and whom we hope will return in glory through the intercession of our priesthood, the Edmontonoilers, but it’s probably of no interest to anyone but anthropologists.)
I thought the Pocklington Heresy was dead!
Of course the One True Religion has fallen on hard times. But Les Habitants remain faithful, and have even built a new cathedral.
MAJeff @108,
All the Iowa Dutch fundies
If you don’t mind my asking: CRC or RCA?
Years ago, when I lived in New York and was a churchgoer, I attended a RCA congregation. I no longer believe what they believe, but have only the warmest memories of the community. Mind you, the RCA exists at the border zone between mainstream liberal protestantism and evangelicalism; a congregation in New York and one in the rural midwest might find that they had relatively little to share at a church picnic, as it were.
CRC, now: there you’re talking hardcore.
Mothers are typically far more influential on their children’s religious belief than fathers, at least in my experience,
Mother Myers, I salute you! You did a great job with your son’s religious education, and it all came out right!
And Mother Mooser, “Study your Haftorah, or we’ll cut the rest of it off!” was not a really good strategy if you’re trying to raise an observant Jew.
Mother Myers, I salute you! You did a great job with your son’s religious education, and it all came out right!
I’m a little gender confused after reading that.
If you don’t mind my asking: CRC or RCA?
CRC. A few years ago, my uncle was going to sing at the local reformed church. “He won’t be staying for the service, though” my grandmother assured us.
I was at her funeral over Thanksgiving. I hope to never set foot in that part of Iowa again.
Sadly, as a proudly feminist Canadian, I don’t think that conscious feminism has anything to do with the change. Most young women in Canada, just as in the US, fervently decry the label of feminist.
I, too, would like to see some real evidence to support their analysis. There likely isn’t any, however. But they did miss a slew of alternate explanations including the increased participation of women in the workforce and the rise of Sunday shopping (necessitating more people working on Sundays with fewer chances to participate in church or families requiring Sunday morning to “catch up” with chores and errands pushed back by the two breadwinners’ work schedule).
I don’t think, either, that you find a lot of these people who identify as “no religion” being principled and independent-minded. They may not go to church but they’ve absorbed a lot of the worst prejudices of the system including disbelief in evolution and homophobia. As 3+speckled noted in #79, there’s an awful lot of credulity out there for ghosts, angels and other hocus-pocus.
That’s pretty funny. I was stationed in Wyoming and South Dakota. We used to say there were two seasons – Winter and July.
out here in the desert, it’s the exact reverse.
December and Summer.
I grew up in a houseful of, for lack of a better description, Eisenhower Republicans. As Californians, we were somewhat horrified that Reagan got the Republican nomination. But the biggest problem was the lack of decent candidates. In 1979, the only other viable choices on the Republican ticket were John Anderson (who introduced an Amendment to the Constitution that would “recognize the law and authority of Jesus Christ” over the United States) and George Bush, Sr. who, frankly, would have been a better choice as he was more moderate and definitely less flaky. Too bad his oldest son was such a turd.
Still, I held my nose and voted Republican for President and Democrat for Congress through 1996 (believing in checks and balances). In 2000, I was a McCain supporter and with Il Bushi getting the nomination I went Nader for President and Democrat for Congress. Since then I’ve become a Yellow Dog Democrat like my grandmother.
And now, I don’t ever see voting for a Republican again. The last 30 years of Republicanism has been a massive disaster. We had the incredibly corrupt Reagan administration, Bush Sr. covering up his role in the corrupt Reagan administration during his administration, the idiotic Republican Congress during Clinton’s time and the total corrupt, scandal-plagued train-wreck they’ve been since 2000. Plus they’ve systematically driven out moderates, like myself, that were fiscally conservative but socially liberal. Now they’re so driven by an idiotic, poisonous ideology that they’d rather destroy our country than do the right thing for its people.
At this point in my life, the Republicans actually scare me.
Ancarett,
I don’t think there is much evidence to support the claim that feminism has had much to do with the decline of religiosity.
First, the impact of Feminism has been as important in the US as it has been in Canada and Western Europe. But the decline in religiosity has been very different.
Second, as I posted earlier, in the example of France, there are apparently more men that identify as Non Religious, than Women (31% Men and 24% Women).
Too bad his oldest son was such a turd.
I recall seeing his Dad talk about what a poor choice the WPE would make for president on 60 minutes, during the primaries before the WPE was elected.
(I just decided today i would no longer refer to him as anything other than the WPE).
The last 30 years of Republicanism has been a massive disaster.
one could argue that’s because it really hasn’t been “republicanism” at all, but rather “neoconism”.
the WPE is the end result of the massive marketing campaign the Neocons have waged for the last 30 years, which in their minds evidently didn’t go far enough during Reagan’s presidency.
who knows? once the neocons are finally forgotten (if they let us live that long), maybe you will again come to favor a republican platform.
FYI to all you Ontariariariarians…
separate school boards don’t exist in BC – yes, there are Catholic schools (and other religious schools too – Jewish, Islamic, Fundy Xian, etc), and they do get some provincial funding from the education ministry, but only if they follow the provincial curriculum. They have the right to turn away students that don’t meet their academic criteria or pass their entrance exams, which is why the education often seems better – not as much in the way of slow students to slow the class down.
I seem to recall being told that separate school boards were pretty much just an Ontario and Quebec phenomenon, but I could be wrong…
one could argue that’s because it really hasn’t been “republicanism” at all, but rather “neoconism”.
actually existing republicanism
:)
Let’s revive “freethinker.” Not only is freethinker a positive description rather than rather than one based on the lack of an attribute (like a-theist and a-gnostic), but it allows us to make common cause with the “unchurched.” They too might welcome a positive definition of themselves. “Freethinker” really means anyone who thinks for herself, rather than “thinking” (really, engaging in a limited range of mental operations) with thoughts provided some authority, religious or otherwise. Whatever beliefs they may hang onto, the unchurched have rejected the authority of religious institutions. They have started down the dangerous path of autonomous thinking, which inevitably leads to a state of cognitive dissonance with any previously imbibed religious dogma. The easiest way to avoid cognitive discomfort is to avoid church. Without regular brain transfusions, doctrine quietly withers away. The unchurched are atheism’s fellow travelers. So let’s welcome them! Free Thought is a big tent, with room for all anti-dogmatists.
We used to say there were two seasons – Winter and July.
Urban beer drinkers say Canada has only two seasons, winter and patio.
The cultist in Toronto are just like the millenialists — they keep predicting the next arrival of their god each year, and despite being continually disappointed, they keep going to the temple to worship. It’s really sad.
another Canuck atheist woman here. I’ve been sitting here trying to think if I know anyone who attends church. Finally came up with one woman who goes from time to time. Otherwise, not a single friend or relative is a churchgoer. It’s just not something we do.
I remember encountering my first creationist on a message board about three years ago. Was flabbergasted that someone didn’t “believe” in evolution. It blew my mind! Somebody still believes the fairy tales?
Turns out there are more of them out there than I ever dreamed. ;)
Quoting Jsn #47… Isn’t what is being unsaid here is that we assume fewer woman than men to be nontheistic because women seem to be the primary churchgoers or is there a more pernicious myth that women buy into belief systems more readily (i.e. women are less logical and more emotional than men)?
The funny thing is that Xian men seem to be the most rabidly illogical publicly, excepting Coulter of course.
The female of the species is ‘naturally’ more conservative (with a little ‘c’) and more socially attuned than the male, an adaptation to the rigours of long gestation and child-rearing. The male is born and/or taught to be risk-taking, competitive and adventurous so is more likely to entertain a wild notion, demand answers and go out to search for new information. The female is more likely to entertain the viewpoint of the majority, accept answers and receive information as she can see that almost everything is relative and almost everything is about relationships. Males persist in their belief that they have relationships with objects and abstracts when they really only own or have control of an object if there is a concensus amongst their peers that they do.
Essentially, men invent gods and UFOs (and laws and countries and scientific discoveries) and, for some things, women go along with it, ‘legitimising’ their existence and then maintaining the concensus when the men get bored and move on. Feminism rocked the boat but didn’t sink it because, much as women wanted a fair go at life they want to be granted exclusive control of their babies more. Which requires social consent, which reinforces their behaviour as maintainers of the concensus.
Which brings me to the point. The red “A” campaign is intended to highlight the number of non-religious people out there to show that it is socially acceptable not to pay lip service to the religions. Given the void between those who declare themselves believers and actual church goers a tipping point may be within reach where the default social position is non-belief. This has occurred already in much of western europe and is perhaps what is happening in Canada.
If a non-theist candidate wins the USian presidential election then one might conclude that the majority of the electorate are more lip-servant than true-believer and that the women of the USA will stop wasting their, and their childrens time when there is a competing concensus to align with. It will still take a generation or two to seep through and there might be a backlash amongst the young males who feel that they have been denied some precious object that is theirs ‘by right’.
This is the pattern that appears to be unfolding amongst the first generation of UK muslims who were born in this country of parents who emigrated to Britain in the 1960s and adjusted to the relatively laissez faire western moral climate here and had to diminish themselves in the face of the less than welcoming British society. Some young muslim men take for granted the comforts of life that their parents sacrificed much for and feel that they should also have the traditional honour and rights of a wealthy, virile male. Islam tells them that they are owed respect, not indifference or even insolence which their parents put up with for the sake of the lifestyle that the young males take for granted. (The young females, I suspect, are happy to follow the laissez faire cultural concensus rather than the islamic alternative.)
There is a similar, minor feminist backlash amongst young women who, taking for granted the opportunities they now have, want the ‘good old days’ of male chivalry and generosity back as well.
In fact, this might be what is happening in the USA already. In the post war decades religious influences waned and the resurgence in the USA is more vitriolic and aggressive, pushing the idea that not going to church is wrong. Many issues have been raised since the resurgence got under way intended to force people to declare themselves with the church. Abortion, contraception, creationism, church-state separation have all been resurrected by religious objections to a previously existing status-quo. Prefixing the word ‘family’ to every religious position indicates the constituency to which they are most directly appealing.
Sure they are loud and potentially dangerous but they are pretty desperate (and male). The women will listen to the words but act on the concensus of the ambience perceived by their social circle. The more shouty and demanding the religions get the less support they will receive. The only danger is that the religious shouters will succeed in drowning out everything else. The ‘new’ atheist shouters, then are necessary and one must hope that the reason behind their shouts tempers their noise.
And once the concensus moves away from the necessity of religious lip-service, the religions lose the one weapon which is currently making them a force in politics and culture; their vast cash-flow. Al-Quaeda would be nothing without Bin Ladens Billions – is anyone concerned about being blown up by the Taliban, now their drug money has dried up? They will become as noisily irrelevant as the Raelians.
<>i>in Ontario where I’m from, the catholic school system offers an overall better education than the public school system.
I’m going to disagree. It has that reputation, but my mother was (now retired) a public schol teacher, and there are things you just don’t hear about the Catholic schools…
women do believe in almost every form of the supernatural and paranormal more than men do
I think that they tend to believe in different crap, not more. Men are more likely to fall for “tech-woo”. Magic carberators, water ooga, tinfoil hats, etc.
I also think women are generally raised to be non-confrontational, and that has a lot to do with them being in the bunnies and light brigade.
Some people don’t like our hate speech laws (the Steyn case is a civil case, BTW). Some don’t like our gun laws, or our game laws, or our abortion laws (none), and the DEA really hates our marijauna laws.
Would you like a list of the US laws *I* don’t like?
Ichthyic, thank you so much for the name check. But I feel compelled to point out that there are lots of other great female atheist bloggers out there. An Apostate’s Chapel, Letters from a Broad, Skepchick, A Whore in the Temple of Reason… Check out the blogrolls. There aren’t as many of us as I’d like (the Carnival of the Godless can be a bit of a sausage-fest), but we’re here.
And there are also female atheist bloggers who don’t blog a lot specifically about atheism, but who do bring it up from time to time. Susie Bright leaps to mind.
Another Canadian atheist checking in here, from SW Ontario.
I commute to university from an economically depressed small city/large town, and even given the aging population of increasingly semi-employed people (the young and professional tend to move on to Hamilton, Toronto, or London, taking with them the remaining non-service industry job) churches are closing, consolidating, or just lurching on with greatly diminished numbers. Churches sit empty, or are converted to condos. A few seem to be thriving, but that is illusory: they are just swelled by the left-over congregations of closed and abandoned churches.
Most people seem to have though of something better to do with their Sunday mornings, or have simply left town, leaving the older church audiences to die-off. Of the younger people who remain (I have a relative who informs on the church I went to as a child, and over the years I’ve been compelled to attend a few xmas-period services) it is down to mostly zealots and a few still going through the motions. I look forward to the continued diminution of the moderate church-goer population, as it leaves the nutty ones exposed to the world without the concealment of the moderate community. I think the harsh light of day will evaporate the remaining extremists, who themselves will portray organized religion in an unflattering light.
I find that church attendance is scarce among my peers. As far as stated affiliations go, I believe a lot of them are soft-atheist/agnostic or CINOs. Not many will flatly state anything from the no-religion/atheist categories, but far fewer will accept labels like fundamentalist or literalist.
My younger brother (also a hardened atheist) is stranded in a ‘religion in pop culture’ class by his program requirements and schedule. The class, he tells me, is presented by a smarmy christian who makes his own views clear, but then feints with the idea that he is only presenting ‘their’ position. Needless to say, ‘religion’ in all cases means ‘variants of christianity’. So far he has learned that no matter how much religious rot fills out shows like “Touched by an angel”, “Saving Grace” or “Joan of Arcadia”, the snake handlers are never satisfied. The small class, other than my bro, is made up of people who wanted to discuss how Hollywood elites (and I think we all know what they imply when they say that) attack christianity and christians. I feel great pity for my brother, I only hope he can secure the needed credit without blowing a gasket.
I have to agree with some of the earlier posts about the role of feminism and the rate of belief in non-religious supernatural malarkey. As I said, I attend a university with a large humanities program, and I pay attention to what people talk about as far as religion and progressive concerns go.
As post #122 said, most young women decry the label feminist, mock the instruction they receive in feminist theories, and generally repudiate feminism as a whole. Its painfully sad to listen to educated young women dismiss feminism with off-the-shelf lines you could hear on conservative radio or from misogynistic comedy.
My impression is that a shocking number of people, and, from what I have seen, mostly women, believe in ghosts, psychic phenomena, and whatever other crap you might see on TV at prime time. I am not surprised by the quoted stats at all. I certainly think we are living in ‘interesting times’ if more people believe, with greater conviction, in spectres and spooks than in the major monotheistic religions.
(Apologies for the poorly written, rambling post, I was overtaken by the urge to reply, despite it being nearly 4:30am.)
Harris Poll did a survey in 2006 on religious belief. The difference between major European countries and the U.S. is dramatic.
Except for Italy, disbelief is above 40% in these countries with a high of 64% in France. It is odd that now the French Huckabee, Pres. Sarkozy, talks more and more about bringing religion back into public life. I don’t think he was elected on that platform.
http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/allnewsbydate.asp?NewsID=1131
Call me a greybeard, but I remember the old liturgy they used in Winterpeg.
“Hot enough fer ya, eh?” for half the year, followed by “Cold enough fer ya, eh?” for the next half, with a week or two of confusion during the changeover.
I’ve always wondered if the reason for the emphasis on making sure young girls were well indoctrinated in their religion was that it would help them to say no, what with all the misogynist assumptions that only women bear the responsibility for intercourse. I recall dating two different women in the ’80s who told me that because of their religion they wouldn’t be honouring any offers.
Barb @131,
Let’s revive “freethinker.”
Excellent idea. Though I am not an atheist, that’s a label I can happily accept.
Part of me would really like to be an atheist. I used to be a Christian, but my views have evolved to the point that I do not believe any text is in any way divinely inspired; do not belong to or believe the doctrines of any religion; and do believe that all religions, and all of their attributes, whether good, bad or indifferent, are purely human inventions (and that those attributes are likelier to be bad than good). And, as some readers might have gathered from occasional comments of mine here, I am secularist nearly to the point of fanaticism. Unfortunately, I keep finding that a belief in God gets in the way of my calling myself “atheist”.
Now, the God I believe in isn’t one that has a religion attached to it. I don’t think there’s anything intelligible to be said about it, other than that it exists. Whether it is in some way an “intelligence” I cannot say, but I think that is anyway a question that certainly cannot be answered, and quite possibly doesn’t even have a meaning. And my God is not something one would worship or pray to. In fact, I wouldn’t even call myself a deist, because the deist God is still too anthropomorphic for my taste. Perhaps “God” isn’t a helpful term for what I believe exists (too historically loaded). Perhaps the thing I believe in would be better conceived of as a verb than as a noun.
But I do believe that something exists that we would, however loosely, label “God”. And so I don’t feel that I can in honesty claim to be an atheist. “Freethinker”, though, will do just fine.
Maybe Dawkins can design a big red F for us.
Bernarda,
also according to this study, it doesn’t look as if the influence of the mother in the decline in religiosity is as important as this globe and mail article seems to suggest :
– in the more atheist western european countries, influence of the parents in the religious choices of the children is on average, influenced by :
7% mother
5% father
45% both parents
33% different from parents
10% unsure
Also, comparing Sarkozy and Huckabee is quite exagerated. Romney or Giuliani would be more adequate.
The study might be right. I know that anecdotes are not data but I’ve made a policy of supporting organizations that treat women equally and not supporting those that don’t.
When the CEO of Royal Bank of Canada announced that it was impossible to find women who were qualified to sit on the board of directors, my mother and I went to our branch and closed our accounts.
When our church announced that women would never be clergy, I said, “Then they don’t want me in the congregation.” They’ve since relented but I’m happy without them.
#135:
Um… right. Have fun proving which parts of the observed behavior differences between modern men and modern women are “natural” and which parts are learned (and which parts aren’t even really there at all, but people expect to see them so strongly that they *do* see them).
Once you have hard evidence of that, then we can get started on the rest of your post…
Hint: Your post shows signs of hyper-adaptationism. You might find that getting in the way of your thinking, if you intend to do any.
Regarding the incidence of people being polled claiming to believe in ghosts and angels: I think that may in part be a pop culture response to information gathering devices like polls and statistics forms. I know it sounds stupid (because it is), but I have found that confronting someone on a professed belief in ghosts or angels or other popular-on-TV supernaturalism usually causes that person, on reflection, to admit they maybe don’t really believe that, anymore than they really believe Tim Horton’s puts nicotine in the coffee to make it addictive. It’s just repeating office/party/bar one-of-the-crowd conversational gambits.
If I was an anthropologist, I might have been able to verbalize that more clearly. Sometimes being a minor artist really sucks – besides the pay.
Bee, (surely the one I know from Backreaction), I dig seeing your posts anywhere. You have a point, and some say that affects whether voters will admit they don’t want to vote for a black man etc.
Getting back to women and work: This is not anti-feminism, just something to consider for economic effect. When more women began entering the labor force, didn’t that put downward pressure on wages because of an increase in labor supply. Maybe the demand could keep up, but did it? (It sure didn’t have to for reasons of political correctness, it did whatever it did or didn’t do for real and not to satisfy ideological preferences.)
Madelyn Murray O’Hair got a bit less active after she was murdered to find her secret stores of hidden gold. And no, she didn’t have any hidden stores of gold it was a pretty stupid lie that religionists told about her, which when believed, lead pretty directly to her death.
Though I can name a dozen other living and attractively brilliant atheist women.
Getting back to women and work: This is not anti-feminism, just something to consider for economic effect. When more women began entering the labor force, didn’t that put downward pressure on wages because of an increase in labor supply. Maybe the demand could keep up, but did it
The much larger issue was deindustrialization. It just happened to coincide with the major entrance of (middle class) women into the workforce (poor women had already been there, cleaning houses and working in textile factories, etc.).
So apparently we have the feminists to thank for this?
Thank you feminists.
A thought I had was touched on by Moses @#24, and tangentially by Ichthyic @#82. That article talked about dwindling congregations mostly in the traditional, established churches in Canada: the Catholic, Presbyterian, United, and Anglican churches. This is anecdotal, but I am seeing an explosion of non-affiliated or alternate churches springing up recently. These are churches that do not belong to any traditional religious group. They preach touchy-feely religion. God is whatever you want to believe he is, and all good people go to heaven regardless of their own personal beliefs (even atheists). I would love to see some numbers describing the growth of these churches over the past forty years. Are people truly moving away from religion, or are they just moving away from the traditional churches?
Paul
Check out this quote from Canada Census 2001 Data product: Religions in Canada
The 2001 Census also recorded an increase in those reporting simply that they were “Christian”,without specifying a Catholic, Protestant or Christian Orthodox faith. This group more than doubled (+121%) during the decade to 780,400, representing 2.6% of the population in 2001.
This was one of the largest percentage increases among all major religious groups.
In addition, far more Canadians reported in the 2001 Census that they had no religion. This group accounted for 16% of the population in 2001, compared with 12% a decade earlier
You can read the whole thing at http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census01/Products/Analytic/companion/rel/pdf/96F0030XIE2001015.pdf
The idea that more people believe in angels in Canada than ghosts strikes me as peculiar. After all angels are a concept largely connected to the “Big 3” monotheistic religions, while ghosts are non-denominational. Its entirely possible for an atheist to believe in some form of survival beyond death that would allow the existence of something we’d call a ghost, while angels are supposedly the direct servants of God.
Catholic school boards aren’t just an Eastern Canadian thing. I went to grade school in the Catholic system here in Saskatoon, but to high school in the public system. Ultimately religion didn’t take with me.
The Canadian Encyclopedia has a nice set of pages starting here dealing with the history and current state of the public and separate (read: denominational) school systems and how they came to be. A moderately interesting note is that the “separate” board for a region is that in which the religion (Catholic/Protestant) was a minority at the time of Confederation. As a result, we have places like St. Albert, AB, where the ‘public’ board is Catholic. And IIRC, when Newfoundland joined in 1947, there were seven recognized denominations and therefore publicly funded school systems. I don’t believe that lasted for long, though.
As a former separate school student, but now an atheist Albertan teacher who has taught for both boards (and now would have to declare myself as ineligible for the separate), here in Alberta they seem relatively harmless. The separate board must still meet all the criteria of fairly rigorous provincial curricula. For all that the separate board mandates that Catholicism must be infused into all programs, religion sits more like a cherry on top of the sundae that everybody gets. I know that I had my hands full enough just coming up with lesson content that I never had time to do anything of the sort.
If you asked me what really irked me in Alberta school politics, it wouldn’t be separate school boards, but rather the fact that so-called private schools still receive 65% of the per-pupil grant from government tax-raised funds, and yet charge tens of thousands of tuition.
melior: Amazingly, BC also has a lot of fundies – to the point that Canada’s fundy university (Trinity Western) is there.
David Marjanović, OM: Actually, it isn’t that simple, since the official Catholic position is that the soul is responsible for certain (they don’t specify which) psychological facilities.
CanadianChick: Even in Quebec, the schoolboards are now language-divided, which makes a bit more sense than religious (Catholic) and almost-secular (the way the so-called Protestant was at the time of dismantling) boards.
#133:
At least you’ve still got it better than Boston. It’s been 32 years, and we’ve turned to different faiths entirely — gods like Curt, Manny, David, Daisuke, and Mike, and (most importantly right now) Tom, Wes, Randy, Tedy, Rodney, Richard, and Junior.
But one day…
Tom
I’ll worship that.
#156: “…of Finland”? ;)
#157, let’s just say an AFC QB Sandwich (with this weekend’s ingredients) is a yummy thing.
As a woman who aspires to be seen as a spokesperson for atheism, I completely endorse this suggestion! :D
Vashti McCollum (1912-2006) was responsible for removing religous instruction from American Public schools.
In Calgary, the Separate (Catholic) school board voted to put the Golden Compass etc. books back on the school library shelves.