Religion does more harm than good - (UK) poll

[DoYouEverWonder]

December 23, 2006

More people in Britain think religion causes harm than believe it does good, according to a Guardian/ICM poll published today. It shows that an overwhelming majority see religion as a cause of division and tension - greatly outnumbering the smaller majority who also believe that it can be a force for good.

The poll also reveals that non-believers outnumber believers in Britain by almost two to one. It paints a picture of a sceptical nation with massive doubts about the effect religion has on society: 82% of those questioned say they see religion as a cause of division and tension between people. Only 16% disagree. The findings are at odds with attempts by some religious leaders to define the country as one made up of many faith communities.

Most people have no personal faith, the poll shows, with only 33% of those questioned describing themselves as "a religious person". A clear majority, 63%, say that they are not religious - including more than half of those who describe themselves as Christian.

Older people and women are the most likely to believe in a god, with 37% of women saying they are religious, compared with 29% of men.

The findings come at the end of a year in which multiculturalism and the role of different faiths in society has been at the heart of a divisive political debate.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1977950,00.html

We needed a poll to figure this out? Then why am I not surprised?

[mr blur]

1. Still some hope for this country then.

I love this bit:

"A clear majority, 63%, say that they are not religious - including more than half of those who describe themselves as Christian."

[Briar]

2. I suspect people are being encouraged to think

of this as a marker of "Englishness". It's part of the regrettable resurgence of religious identities. This isn't as scary as the survey that discovered that something like a third of our biology students believe in ID.

[non sociopath skin]

3. Just glancing at a right-wing website where a "Christian" was pontificating on this ...

... and suggested that what it meant was not that "religion" was harmful but that ... tee hee ... " a religion was harmful". And guess which one? Here's a clue. It wasn't Christianity.

Merry Christmas, Father Ebenezer!!!

The Skin

[Briar]

4. I love it when Christians justify their hatred of

other religions, and willingness to make war on them, on the grounds that theirs is a faith based on love and forgiveness.

[non sociopath skin]

5. Yup. Some sad, sick, dangerous folk out there...

The Skin

[non sociopath skin]

6. Victimisation? Ooh, yes please ....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2663539

The Skin

[fedsron2us]

7. Like it or not religion in one form or another is as old as the human race

so I would recommend that those who think it is going to disappear any time soon not to punt away their life savings on this outcome down at Ladbrokes. The British generally don't like being told how to think and behave by priests of whatever ilk. This anti clerical tradition has a long pedigree and can be traced back as far as the Peasants Revolt in the Middle Ages.

It would be unwise to assume that the current views of the British or other Western Europeans is necessarily typical of the rest of the world where religion shows an increasing sign of being a dominant influence in the next century. Secularist may not like the way events are unfolding but simply denouncing all the members of the major faiths as a bunch of irrational nutters is not necessarily going to be the best way to secure the future of this planet.

[non sociopath skin]

9. The word "secularist" is a bit like the word "non-smoker". It suggests there's something iffy ...

about not doing something totally irrational.

Secularists may not like the way events are unfolding but simply denouncing all the members of the major faiths as a bunch of irrational nutters is not necessarily going to be the best way to secure the future of this planet.

Problem is that the "members of the major faiths" (and the members of minor ones, too) have spent centuries treating "secularists" as a bunch of irrational and dangerous nutters - who are probably best cured by exclusion, torture and extermination.

I not only don't like the way things are unfolding. I intend to spend the remainder of my days actively opposing it.

Merry Christmas.

The Skin

[fedsron2us]

11. Looks like we are all in for a very bumpy ride then.

Surely, you do not think that all Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus etc believe in 'exclusion, torture and extermination', any more than all socialists approve of these practises under Stalin or Mao. The 'no dialogue' with the axis of religion I keep hearing in certain parts of DU seems strangely reminiscent of certain statements I have heard recently from Messrs Bush and Blair. Truely we live in dangerous times.

[LeftishBrit]

13. I agree with you - and I'm a complete atheist myself

But I know enough reasonable, non-doctrinaire religious people of various faiths who are as left-wing or more so than I am, that I don't automatically assume religious people are intolerant nutcases like the Christian Right in America, or the Taliban.

Religion becomes evil when, and only when, people try to force their beliefs and customs on others, or use religion to justify autocratic rule by particular individuals or groups or the demonization of other individuals or groups - from the Divine Right of Kings to the Divine Right of Bush; from the religious wars of Northern Ireland to the religious wars of Iran and Iraq. And any belief, even one that doesn't involve a supernatural God, can be used in this way. Interesting that you mention Stalin and Mao, because they did use the name of socialism in the same perverted way that the nasty religious politicians use the name of God; and established their own brands of theocracy.

I'm no special fan of religion, but I think that it is not religion, but its misuse in political power-struggles, that is the problem; and that if formal religion were abolished tomorrow, the politicians, dictators and terrorists would find plenty of substitutes - from ethnicity, to which football team you support!

[fedsron2us]

14. My parents subscribed to no religious creed and neither do I.

What I can not understand is the extreme hostility to those who hold religious beliefs that manifests itself on DU. The idea that their faith is some kind of perversion or contagion that must be confronted, denounced, ridiculed and destroyed just sounds too close to some of the language emanating out of Germany in the 1920s and 1930s. I have no problem with the reasoned criticism of religious intolerance and hypocrisy but some of the things I have read on this site (to be fair not on the UK Forum) goes too far.

[mr blur]

10. But I'm afraid I think that

all members of the major (and minor) faiths are "a bunch of irrational nutters". And I mean all of them. Delusion and fantasy is no basis for a stable, meaningful life.

[fedsron2us]

12. Sadly. 'irrational nutterdom' is pretty close to the normal human condition

Many people base large parts of their lives on delusion and fantasy, just ask the supporters of any football team. Dealing with this aspect of existence is a key to building a saner world. Denying it, as King Pentheus does in Euripedes play the Bacchae, just leads to a different kind of madness.

http://www.sparknotes.com/drama/bacchae/canalysis.html

What I am trying to say is that, although God may not exist, religious belief certainly does. It is demonstratably a phenomenon amongst nearly all humans societies. To ignore this reality or to denounce religion without any real attempt to understand its function is itself unscientific and irrational. It is what some people have described as the 'Dawkins Paradox'.

[mr blur]

16. Yes, you are of course right.

But I can't help thinking of the Captain Beefheart quote: "There's no point in looking into the bullshit just to see what the bull ate."

[stormymonday]

8. Presumably they will not be buying this guys records

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6k-UxVhIZ8&mode=related&search=

Great music though

[sweetheart]

15. the mystery divine

in every soul be the mystery divine
weather atoll be mine
every troll, free republic assign...,
weather a cold,
every doll, the public malign;
a sign behold,
beyond befold the design

[SoftUnderbelly]

17. no big surprise

im in my twenties and i only know one person who goes to church for anything other than a christening, wedding or funeral. out of all my friends i cant think of any that wouldnt describe themselves as an atheist or agnostic. a lot of people will still call themselves christians, as mentioned in the article, but only because of tradition - not many of them actually believe in god, nevermind him having a son. most people will still put 'church of england' down when filling in the census but the churches will remain empty.

i think this is all great news.

[mr blur]

18. Speaking of filling in forms,

I understand that enough people in the UK put "Jedi" on the census form for it to be recognised as a religious faith. Excellent! Says it all, really.

[Nihil]

19. Ahem!

*Holds hand up now*

My eldest was most p*ssed off that he had to be registered as "CoE"
rather than "Jedi" like his Dad ...

I said that it was one of those little lessons that a paduan had to understand :-)