If peace on earth is our goal, atheism might be the means to that end

[cbayer]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/06/peace-on-earth-atheism

The nonreligious are more liberal and more pacifist on most issues relating to violence: torture, the death penalty, corporal punishment, imperialism and more

Adam Lee
theguardian.com, Tuesday 6 January 2015 12.30 GMT


Some things might be incompatible with peace. Photograph: Jayel Aheram / Flickr

The quiet truth behind the inescapable headlines about man’s inhumanity to man is that the world is actually becoming a more peaceful place. Deaths from war and conflict have been declining for decades – and, if current trends continue, we can make them rarer still.

What mysterious force is sowing peace among humankind? One possible reason is that there are more atheists and nonbelievers than ever before.

In America, millennials are the largest and least religious generation in the country’s history. The trend toward secularization in the US mirrors the movement in Europe and throughout the developed world. And poll after poll have shown that the nonreligious also lean more progressive and more pacifist on a wide variety of issues relating to violence: torture, the death penalty, corporal punishment, military adventurism and more.

A Pew poll from 2009, well before the Senate released its devastating torture report last month, asked whether torturing suspected terrorists could be justified found that the non-religious were most opposed to torture, with a combined 55% saying that it could rarely or never be justified. Gallup has also found that people with no religious preference are less supportive of the death penalty than any group of Christians. The non-religious are also among the most likely to say the invasion of Iraq was a mistake. The religiously unaffiliated are also less likely than Christians to believe that the US is superior to all other countries in the world, a hyper-patriotic attitude that’s hardly conducive to careful reflection about the use of American military power.

more at link

[edhopper]

1. As much as I think

religion does cause a great deal of turmoil. I have no reason to think removing it would remove conflict.

There may be a lot of correlation without causation in these polls.

[cbayer]

2. I agree, but I thought it was an interesting analysis.

The demographics, including political leanings, are interesting.

I think men will find a reason to fight among themselves with or without religion. Religion just provides a cover sometimes.

The recent polls on approval of torture were interesting, but even the numbers within the non-believer category were pretty shocking.

[edhopper]

3. Yes

I do find that troubling.

It is similar to death penalty discussions. No matter how much info proves it has no effect on homicide rates, people still want to see people die.

[cbayer]

4. Exactly. Revenge is a powerful motivator.

I had a partner who used to say, "When you seek revenge, dig two graves". This has been a handy reminder for me when I am feeling particularly vengeful.

[edhopper]

5. Hell

I heard that plenty of times as we went into the Iraq War from GOP family members. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, but at least Bush hit someone.
Seriously, they were a Muslim country, so who cares if they were responsible.

[cbayer]

6. The was a thirst for blood that was palpable.

People, even some otherwise very bright and good people, closed their eyes and covered their ears. We had to have revenge and any brown people would do.

[trotsky]

9. I don't know that I've ever seen anyone suggest that eliminating religion would remove all conflict.

Have you?

[edhopper]

10. The title says

"If peace on earth is our goal...", which is what I was responding to.

But yeah, it's a bit of a strawman.

[trotsky]

11. Yeah given the actual content of the piece I would guess someone else picked the headline.

As is pretty typical for publications. But hey, it matches a worn-out straw man that evil anti-theists think getting rid of religion would solve all our problems so some are going to run with that. Pity, since it detracts from an honest analysis.

[TexasProgresive]

7. I am a believer in the strength of human nature.

To misquote George Aiken-
If we were to wake up some morning and find that everyone was atheist, we would find some other causes for contention by noon.

The Pew poll is not conclusive of the premise that if more people became atheists then they would be more liberal. Perhaps if more people become liberal there will be more atheist. My guess is that liberals are more prone to reject belief in God. But even among liberals there is a subset of theists.

Here's Mr Aiken's actual words:

If we were to wake up some morning and find that everyone was the same race, creed and color, we would find some other causes for prejudice by noon.

P.S. Thanks for causing be to find the person who said the above. I read it as a child in Reader's Digest and never forgot it.

[cbayer]

8. "Perhaps if more people become liberal there will be more atheists"

That is a much more logical conclusion that the other way around.

There is a very strong set of theists among liberals.

The Pew data on torture was really more about political identification than religious identification, imo. I don't think it convincingly showed that some kinds of believers are more in favor of torture because of their beliefs. Like there is a higher percentage of liberals among atheists, there is a higher percentage of conservatives among fundamentalists.

I think George Aiken's quote says it exactly right.

[FBaggins]

12. I'll side instead with the Founders on that one

The nonreligious are more liberal and more pacifist on most issues relating to violence: torture, the death penalty, corporal punishment, imperialism and more

Within our current free society, that may well be true. It certainly isn't universally so.

I prefer John Adam's take that there is "no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion" - or Washington's "While just government protects all in their religious rights, true religion affords to government its surest support"

[cbayer]

14. From what links he does supply, he seems to be mostly relying on data

from US surveys. It's in a UK paper, so is he also talking about British atheists? I doubt that he has data from, say, China, that would support his assertions.

I agree with you and Adams. It is critical that we carefully guard the 1st amendment and keep our government free of religion.

As to the Washington quote, I don't really get it or see how it supports your position.

[FBaggins]

17. I'll expand on Washington

As I'm sure we agree... "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed" to secure ththe "unalienable rights" (including life, liberty, and persuit of happiness).

If peace on earth is our goal... then such governments are essential... and "true religion affords to government its surest support"

[cbayer]

18. I am still not at all clear on this. What does he mean by true religion?

[FBaggins]

19. He's intentionally vague there

This isn't a call for my prefered brand of religion. It certainly wasn't for Washington.

True religion is that which inspires us to virtue, wisdom and morality.

[trotsky]

20. "True religion is that which inspires us to virtue, wisdom and morality."

According to whom? Who gets to define those 3 words?

[FBaggins]

21. In this case...

... Washington gets to define them - just as he does "true" and "relgion"

I suspect that I agree with him... but you're free to use your own notions.

[trotsky]

23. How many slaves did he own again? n/t

[edhopper]

24. 123

though there were 318 at Mount Vernon.

http://www.mountvernon.org/george-washington/slavery/ten-facts-about-washington-slavery/

The ones he owned were freed on his death. (but there is more to that story)

[trotsky]

25. So yeah, I don't feel so bad about using my "own notions" about virtue, wisdom, and morality. n/t

[cbayer]

22. Ok, that makes more sense, I guess.

It is as if he put quotes around religion, right? Redefining it as something completely different?

[mmonk]

13. Before anyone jumps to conclusions,

I'm not sure of any claims. Probably because I couldn't tell much difference between Christopher Hitchens and the Bush administration over the Iraq War, an unnecessary one. Also I know what greed can do to a person.

[cbayer]

15. He brings up Hitchens in his concluding remarks.

One can only remark of demographic data and that can never be applied to every person in the set.

[mmonk]

16. Sorry I didn't read the whole thing

and just reacted. Must be the agnostic part of me and proclamations. 😊

[Dawson Leery]

26. kick

[pinto]

27. Global Peace Index (cited in the Guardian article)

http://www.visionofhumanity.org/#/page/indexes/global-peace-index

The Global Peace Index measures peace in 162 countries according to 22 indicators that gauge the absence of violence or the fear of violence. This is the 8th year the index has been produced.

<snip>

Methodology

The Global Peace Index ranks 162 countries covering 99.6% of the world’s population. The Index gauges global peace using three themes: the level of safety and security in society, the extent of domestic or international conflict, and the degree of militarisation. It ranks countries according to 22 indicators of peace. Read the Global Peace Index methodology article for a full list of indicators, scores, weighting and more. More on GPI methodology.

Explore

Explore the Global Peace Index interactive map to see where the countries of the world rank according to their peacefulness. Download the 2014 Global Peace Index Report to read an analysis of the state of peace, as well as the countries most at risk of becoming less peaceful.

http://www.visionofhumanity.org/#/page/our-gpi-findings

[cbayer]

28. Well, that's fascinating.

While one can see a possible correlation between religiosity and low peace index, there is also a pretty clear correlation with poverty.

It is difficult to tease those things apart.

[pinto]

29. Yeah. Perhaps income inequality plays a key role as well. Or they both play concurrent roles.

Correlations seem pertinent for both.

[cbayer]

30. IIRC, the only consistent correlation with degree of religiosity

is economic status. That is true for countries, regions, states, etc.

[notadmblnd]

31. and I was just saying..... without religion there might be a chance for people to live without war.

Member? You member.

[locks]

32. This discussion and the one about the values that believers and non-believers share I think

need to deal with what we believe about "peace" and "repudiation of violence" and did our religion or lack of religion help us form our thinking. "The Buddha was completely uncompromising on the question of violence. When people are violent they are not following the Buddha's teaching." Yet we have many violent Buddhists in the world. Substitute Jesus for the Buddha and you cannot find in the New Testament Jesus ever justifying violence. Buddhists, Christians, atheists, Muslims, Jews profess to be peacemakers while they are committing violence or paying for it and calling it "self-defense", last resort, just war, even naming our guns, bombs and drones "peacemakers" and believing we are doing the right thing.

The Peace Index doesn't help us very much; if a country has had no internal conflict this year but its people are starving and dying from disease is it a peaceful country? If the strongest country in the world has more arms than the rest of the world together for its "security" is it repudiating violence and maintaining the peace?

We may agree that the Civil War was the deadliest conflict in U.S. history, costing 750,000 American lives. But
before the war four million men, women, and children were enslaved, in some states more than half the population were in bondage. Was that a peaceful time?

[Warren Stupidity]

33. Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth.

Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.

Or so it was allegedly written by unknown persons who said it was something that somebody named Matthew heard that this alleged jesus of nazareth said.