OK, World, you’re making some of us Americans feel bad. The Brits are gloating.
The majority of Brits are atheist or agnostic, a poll has found, with only 30% of the population describing themselves as religious.
And the Swedes are even worse: they’re crowing about being the least religious nation in the Western world.
Almost eight out of ten Swedes are either "not religious" or "convinced atheists", according to a new global study that concludes the Nordic nation is the least religious in the West.
Yeah, yeah, we heard all about it. Only that article let slip another fact: the magic word “Western” is their qualifier.
A total of 63,398 people were questioned, with only China, Hong Kong and Japan appearing to have a greater proportion of atheists than Sweden.
So there! Those countries are athier than thou, and do you see them bragging about it? No. They’re so atheist that they can be totally cool about it.
I didn’t even bother to look up the ranking of the United States in this poll. I just read this article about Pensacola Christian College, I don’t need a bunch of statistics to tell me the US support of religion is fucked up and destructive.
Ok, so those are the results for the religion/god part of things, where is the rest of the supernatural nonsense? How well does the UK fare in woo believes? And China? I’m betting not that good…
Huzzah! I R the winnah!
That is so utterly, utterly fucked I just don’t even…
I’m not sure if you spotted it, PZ, but there’s something very interesting in that article about Pensacola CC . It features an appearance by that rarest of beasts, the “All men are rapists” idea. Yes, that’s right, they’ve finally found an example of those horrible lesbian feminazis teaching young girls that All Men Are Rapists. Oh, wait, it’s not feminists at all – it’s hardcore Christians.
@azhael
Indeed, if you look at the 2010 Eurobarometer poll you get much worse numbers, once you account for people who believe in some kind of “spirit” or “life force”.
UK:
37% God
33% Spirit / Life force
25% Non-believer
Sweden:
18% God
45% Spirit / Life force
34% Non-believer
Judging by the 2010 numbers, France comes out ahead with 40% Non-believers. Followed by the Czech Republic at 37%.
The study PZ cites is still good news, though. It shows that the wishy-washy spirit people don’t consider themselves religious. Which arguably is a good thing if prevents them from rallying to religiously-motivated causes. But they can hardly be thought of as atheists and they’re certainly not skeptics.
In the formerly GDR parts of Germany we also have an unbelievers rate between 70 and 80 percent. I think I was 10 when I first realized that religion is something that otherwise reasonable people still actually believe in.
Maybe Japan is atheist, but they believe in ghosts (not a joke) and in getting their wishes granted if the write them on a piece of wood that they hang at a temple wall. On average, they are probably not more rational than the bible belt, and rather like the life spirit people in Europe.
But one thing is clear: They won’t ask you about your religion, whether you accept somebody as your personal saviour, and why Jesus is not in the school books.
Religion may not be a big deal in Japan or China, but the main religion they have is Buddhism — a religion is not theistic anyway. So of course they be atheists.
Whatever you do, don’t let David Barton find out about Sweden.
Sweden: Paradoxically, many non-believers remain members of the church.
(priest:) “But then to be a member is not just to do with your personal beliefs. Many Swedes are supporting the social work we are doing, so that is one reason we have a lot of members. People know we need the church in Sweden even if they are not believers”
.
So, in case you think the terrible atheists persecute believers, no they don’t. Like me, many remain members (and provide a nominal fee) because the church organisation does many commendable social works.
For instance, twice a year, the elderly in my mom’s managed care facility get invited to a sermon, after which there is coffe and plenty of cakes (“fika” in Swedish). I use to follow my mom’s group there.
And the church helps the many Rom beggars that come from Romania on temporary visas.
I have heard that in many (Scandinavian) countires it is slightly less than one third who believe in a “proper” religion, and another third who believe in vaguely non-sciency stuff (horoscopes, ghosts, whatever).
“Stop bragging”
This is an open challenge!
.
BTW I have lots of vacation days because I live in a civilised country!
And I spell “aluminium” and “humour” the British way! BWAHAHAHAHAHA.
(chokes on a filet mignon)
I’ll bet a lot of us Brits are feeling vaguely guilty about it, rather than bragging. It’s what we do.
Try looking into the numbers for believers in homoeopathy, chiropractic and acupuncture.
As the article mentions, people were automatically enrolled as infants until 1996. My understanding is that most people simply haven’t bothered to leave the church. I guess some people remain members in order to get access to the physical churches for certain ceremonies (baptism-as-a-ritual, marriages, funerals). I also know that some people hold the misconception that the church needs memberships to maintain the historical buildings and artworks that are in their care.
But I find it surprising and distressing that someone like you, an outspoken atheists, would remain a member. Do you actually believe that the best way to help others is via the church‽ A church which is worth billions, a church who’s activities are inherently exclusionary toward rational people, a church that spends huge amounts of money trying to indoctrinate children to believe in their nonsense, a church which employs people who’s job it is to spread lies? The fact that they also do some charitable work is hardly a good reason to remain a member. Why not simply give your money directly to organizations that primarily focus on doing good and charitable work?
Please reconsider you membership. There are many organizations that are far more capable and that are in much greater need of your support.
Most members were automatically enrolled as infants. My understanding is that most people simply haven’t bothered to leave the church. I guess some people also remain members in order to get access to the physical churches for certain ceremonies (baptisms, marriages, funerals). I also know that some people hold the misconception that the church needs memberships to maintain the historical buildings and artworks that are in their care.
But I find it surprising and distressing that someone like you, an outspoken atheists, would remain a member. Do you actually believe that the best way to help others is via the church‽ A church which is worth billions, a church who’s activities are inherently exclusionary toward rational people, a church that spends huge amounts of money trying to indoctrinate children to believe in their nonsense, a church which employs people who’s job it is to spread lies? The fact that they also do some charitable work is hardly a good reason to remain a member. Why not simply give your money directly to organizations that primarily focus on doing good and charitable work?
Please reconsider you membership. There are many organizations that are far more capable and that are in much greater need of your support.
I’ve got a baby cousin in England who was born with medical issues, and I’ve been following progress via her grand-mum’s Facebook page. In the FB comments, I see lots of people wishing “good luck” but very, very few “I’m praying for her” — which in the US would probably dominate. I do see quite a few “sending positive thoughts” which could be construed as a new-agey-magical thing, I guess.
Eamon Knight #14:
<blockquoteI see lots of people wishing "good luck" but very, very few "I'm praying for her" — which in the US would probably dominate. I do see quite a few "sending positive thoughts" which could be construed as a new-agey-magical thing, I guess.
The closest I’ve ever had to ‘I’ll pray for you’ was a lady who declared ‘God must have sent you,’ after I helped out with a roadside repair. (Blocked fuel pump.)
Positive thoughts for the most part, seem to have become a way to say ‘I’ll be thinking of you,’ when people don’t want to use the same wording somebody else has already used.
What my Japanese wife hates about Christianity is its duality, the emphasis on everything being good/bad or right/wrong or with us/against us. She believes in some kind of supernatural spirit, but couldn’t really describe it and she certainly wouldn’t go to war over it or use it to put others down. Outside of Soka Gakkai, religion in Japan has no particular meaning. People pay lip service to it when they are born, get married or die, but in almost all of those cases, it’s the ritual that appeals, not any deeper meaning of the religion itself. I greatly appreciate the atheistic atmosphere that prevails here.
So….
The lesson of the UK is that those wishing to promote atheism in America should lobby for the country to adopt an official state religion that makes the President the head of the church?
(Then mass emigrate to Sweden, wait 500 years, and come back….)
No, it’s not*. See France, Japan, China, Australia, New Zealand, Czech Republic, former GDR… All low on religiosity, none with a state church.
* I know you’re not being serious, but it is a piece of crap peddled by Rodney Stark, and I’ve seen it seriously advocated by multiple Americans, both believers and atheists.
Yes!!! church = social club (belief in God not necessary). Being part of a social network has many, physiological benefits, that no one claims to be (literally) miraculous. The word might be used (explicitly) metaphorically. God/Bible just clutters it up with superfluous verbiage.
Sorry but I also have to gloat. I’m from Uruguay, which has consistently polled as the country with the highest percentage of atheists in the Americas since polls began at the beginning of the last century. From an early and vigorous separation of state and church at the end of the 19th century all the way to the present with an atheist president (José Mujica) who managed to pass in his term gay marriage and legalized abortion and marijuana.
I doubt there will ever be a large majority of atheists in any free society — at least not for a very long time. It’s just too tempting to want to hedge your bets and believe that there has to be something out there. Personal revelation — the feeling that you have some special knowledge that others don’t have is also a powerful motivation, especially in an era where new (real) knowledge about the world around us is so hard to come by, often requiring years of study and advanced degrees.
Still, I’m more than happy to settle for a large majority made up of non-believers, agnostics, and vaguely spiritual people. It relegates religion in society to a side-show, where it belongs.
As a follow-up to this, a question you should think about when you meet an atheist activist from one of the majority non-believing western countries is ‘why?’
In Dawkins’ case (and In mine, in so far as I’m at least aware of atheist activism), I think it’s due to exposure to American culture, and particularly to active hostility to evolution. For the average European with no particular contacts with the US, it has to be something else.
Did you know that if only 30% of the British population describe themselves as religious, a very significant proportion of that 30% are not white, Islam will by now be vying with Christianity as the dominant remaining religion, and many of the most religious will still be seen as members of immigrant populations (whether they were born in other countries or not)? This plays out in various ways, but it’s one of those little pieces of cultural context it’s helpful to be aware of and which doesn’t come out very well in this kind of statistic.
Actually China had one “religion” (which Mao himself was the one and only deity) before and since iconoclasm had been going on after his death, now it has been the battleground of several “religious-like” stuff: 1) “traditional values”, including classic (highly-patriarchal) confucianism, taoism, plus lots of woo like TCM, acupuncture and other herb “remedies”; 2) Christianity, mainly fundamental creeds (people are proposing to remove evolution from high school text books, seriously, also lots of “America is strong because of their Xian belief bullshit”); 3) Islam, both extreme and non-extreme; 4) Apologetic atheism (“I don’t believe this bullshit, but people should be allowed to propagate it publicly, teach it to children, or use it as real life guidelines”); 5) A tiny bit of Sam-Harris-flavor atheism (much smaller, although begins to gain some popularity).
It seems that the official stance is to endorse (1), to contain (2) and (3) if they go too out of control, but actively discourage any hostile-to-religion flavor of atheism, including (5). Therefore I really don’t think that’s some better state than countries like Sweden.
There is still a lot of joss burning and fruit & roast meat offering to various gods here in Hong Kong.
But at least we don’t have any politicians pushing bigotry or denying science in their names.
Lots of “spiritual” beliefs and traditions in Asia, but at least incense burning doesn’t usually lead to child rape, wars, genocide and reality denial.
It could be argued that countries like Japan and Thailand have catered for people’s desire to be a slave of an almighty being by replacing a supernatural god with a king or emperor. If you have ever stood to attention in a Thai cinema to a minute of king worship playing out on the screen before the movie you’d know what I mean.
Nick @18,
Church attendence may be low here, but Christian woo is everywhere, the government funds “chaplains” to look after primary school children’s mental health, gay marriage is far away due to the lobbying efforts of fundie Christians, and I drove to work all of last week past a cross erected in the central town square sporting “He is Risen” in large letters.
Yes, I’ve spent a lot of time in Thai cinemas standing for the King :-)
Back in the late 19th century and early 20th century many Swedes and Finns were heavily involved in union movements and some communist ones at that. They really worked for the working people. Bravo!
@ Eamon Knight #14
Yeah, it’s kind of rare to come across someone who is openly, fervently religious here. You do get them, but most people seem to find it vaguely embarrassing. My girlfriend’s mother is a regular church goer and is heavily involved with the social side of the church, and until recently sat on her Parish council; she has never once offered to pray for me or even mentioned God in my presence.
The reason, I think, is largely to do with our long and bloody history of sectarian violence between Protestants and Catholics. I think this has engendered a general suspicion of religious fervor within British culture. Therefore, flaunting your religious allegiance in public is simply “not the done thing, old chap”.
Depressingly, the recent swing towards Xenophobic Nationalism and it’s emphasis on “Traditional British Values™” seems to have made it marginally more acceptable to flaunt your allegiance to the C of E in public. I’m hoping it’s not a trend that continues.
Most members were automatically enrolled as infants. My understanding is that most people simply haven’t bothered to leave the church. I guess some people also remain members in order to get access to the physical churches for certain ceremonies (baptisms, marriages, funerals). I also know that some people hold the misconception that the church needs memberships to maintain the historical buildings and artworks that are in their care.
But I find it surprising and distressing that someone like you, an outspoken atheists, would remain a member. Do you actually believe that the best way to help others is via the church‽ A church which is worth billions, a church who’s activities are inherently exclusionary toward atheists and people of other religions, a church which spends huge amounts of time and money trying to indoctrinate children, a church which employs people who’s job it is to spread lies? The fact that they also do some charitable work is hardly a good reason to remain a member. Why not simply give your money directly to organizations that primarily focus on doing good and charitable work?
Please reconsider you membership. There are many organizations that are far more capable and that are in much greater need of your support. Choose an organization with a 90-number to make sure your money is actually used to help people.
birgerjohansson @11:
FTFY.
Being openly religious among the predominant British culture is “not done” – the (apparently common) American small talk question about what church you go to would get strange looks here. It occurred to me as I was writing this that I have no idea if the same applies among predominantly Muslim communities.
Mind you, the head of state is the head of the state religion, the CofE have automatic representation in the House of Lords, and the state funds the running of sectarian church schools, so it’s no secular utopia here.
Also, I suspect the other big difference in the story about a sick kid between the UK and the US is that nobody here will express big concerns about how the family will pay for the treatment. (There are actually big costs to having a sick kid even here, but they are indirect – the costs of being a carer – but people don’t often consider these)
In the US if you mention your cat died on facebook you get a lot of “you’ll be with her again some day.”
Which I’m not so sure about. I don’t think they can legally bury me in the back yard.
re: the Pensacola Christian College article
I grew up in P’cola in the ’60s and ’70s. The article sounds about right for the area. One difference though, related to item 2 where they say the Navy base was off limits, was the willingness of parents for their daughters to attend social functions at the base. Every time there was a graduating class of Navy pilots there would be a graduation ball. The local high school senior and junior college girls would be invited to attend. Parents worked hard to get their daughters invited (a social coupe) and, in my understanding, hoped they would get pregnant in order to ‘capture’ a Navy officer husband. It happened often enough to be ‘a thing’.
Interesting that the most religious country is Thailand.
(Did they dare survey Saudi Arabia and suchlike, though?)
Over here, the Christians would consider “I’m praying for you”/”you’re in my prayers” disgustingly sanctimonious, an announcement that “I’m at least as holy as thou”. Literally nobody has ever claimed to be praying for me, and there are plenty of people in my family who have probably done it.
In our 2013 cencus, 41.9% of all people who stated their religious affiliation reported being non religious.
http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2013-census/profile-and-summary-reports/quickstats-culture-identity/religion.aspx
The weighting had a strong bulge in the 20-45 year olds too.
That almost makes up for living in the same country as Brian Tamaki.