LibriumArcana.Games

Here's the linky.

[quote]Atheists identified as America’s most distrusted minority, according to new U of M study

What: U of M study reveals America’s distrust of atheism
Who: Penny Edgell, associate professor of sociology
Contact: Nina Shepherd, sociology media relations, (612) 599-1148
Mark Cassutt University News Service, (612) 624-8038

MINNEAPOLIS / ST. PAUL (3/28/2006) -- American’s increasing acceptance of religious diversity doesn’t extend to those who don’t believe in a god, according to a national survey by researchers in the University of Minnesota’s department of sociology.

From a telephone sampling of more than 2,000 households, university researchers found that Americans rate atheists below Muslims, recent immigrants, gays and lesbians and other minority groups in “sharing their vision of American society.â€

Kresh wrote:And the Catholics? Catholics believe in Jesus too, don't they?

Catholics have long been looked down upon in this country, ever since the first colonies were settled in ye olde times. IIRC, like there was only one of the original colonies where Catholics could even settle and live without being persecuted by Quakers and all those other loonies. Add to that the fact that I think JFK was our only Catholic president.

I'm not sure why America historically has had such a antagonism toward the Catholics, of course, but I would wager it has something to do with the very religious persecution that drove groups like the Pilgrims and Quakers over here in the first place.

I think that alot of people think that atheism is linked to anarchy. "No religion no morals" type of thought, but that's just me

Unfortunatly, the uneducated Sheeple will see Atheism as moral desitution, and will never learn better. Usually from thier stubbornness to not find out.

I'm not surprised by this study....but I'm not uplifted by it either.

Most of the early settlers were from nations that had fought wars against Catholicism. The Purtians left England because they felt the church was behaving in a Catholic manner (their own behavior becomes doublely ironic in that light).

In early times the Pope was seen as another Monarch and a sneaky one who could pull strings from across national boundaries at that. It doesn't help at all that one Pope before the American Civil War declared that Republicianism and Catholicism didn't mix. He did that in response to the revolts and revolutions of 1849 across Central Europe that required massive military force to put down.

Given this kind of backdrop it is understandable that fears would develop and it shouldn't be shocking that those fears were proven wrong, it is in the nature of humanity to overstate the threat at times.

As Frigid said, the schism between Catholicism and Protestantism was very violent. Remember, this went down in the time when the Rack was still a legitimate judicial instrument. The Catholic hierarchy wasn't keen to surrender their religious supremacy in Western Europe without a fight. The lingering hatred lasted well into the twentieth century (and still has its adherents in the more strict fundamentalist Baptist sects). For example, a good chunk of the sentiment for voting against Kennedy in '60 arose from the fact that he was a Catholic and therefore theoretically under the Earthly authority of the Pope.

Okay no Offense meant to KAN here, but I was unhappy with the report he posted. It seemed a collection of soundbites meant to make athiest feel surrounded and afraid. So I went digging. Saddly for some reason I get an error message on trying to yank up the orginial report but I found an ABC report that covers this in more depth.

ABC

April 2, 2006 -- Given the increasing religiosity of American culture, it's perhaps not too surprising that a new study out this month finds that Americans are not fond of atheists and trust them less than they do other groups. The depth of this distrust is a bit astonishing nonetheless.

More than 2,000 randomly selected people were interviewed by researchers from the University of Minnesota.

Asked whether they would disapprove of a child's wish to marry an atheist, 47.6 percent of those interviewed said yes. Asked the same question about Muslims and African-Americans, the yes responses fell to 33.5 percent and 27.2 percent, respectively. The yes responses for Asian-Americans, Hispanics, Jews and conservative Christians were 18.5 percent, 18.5 percent, 11.8 percent and 6.9 percent, respectively.


When asked which groups did not share their vision of American society, 39.5 percent of those interviewed mentioned atheists. Asked the same question about Muslims and homosexuals, the figures dropped to a slightly less depressing 26.3 percent and 22.6 percent, respectively. For Hispanics, Jews, Asian-Americans and African-Americans, they fell further to 7.6 percent, 7.4 percent, 7.0 percent and 4.6 percent, respectively.


The study contains other results, but these are sufficient to underline its gist: Atheists are seen by many Americans (especially conservative Christians) as alien and are, in the words of sociologist Penny Edgell, the study's lead researcher, "a glaring exception to the rule of increasing tolerance over the last 30 years."

Edgell also maintains that atheists seem to be outside the limits of American morality, which has largely been defined by religion.

Many of those interviewed saw atheists as cultural elitists, amoral materialists, or given to criminal behavior or drugs. She states, "Our findings seem to rest on a view of atheists as self-interested individuals who are not concerned with the common good."

Of course, it should go without saying, but won't, that belief in God isn't at all necessary to have a keen ethical concern for others.

The study will appear in the April issue of the American Sociological Review and is co-written by assistant professor Joseph Gerteis and associate professor Doug Hartmann.

Possible Partial Remedies

The results of this study suggest a couple of partial remedies. One is a movie analogy of "Brokeback Mountain," which dealt with manly cowboys coming to grips with their homosexuality.

A dramatic rendition of a devoutly religious person (or couple) coming to grips with the realization of his (their) disbelief may be eye-opening for many.

A movie version of the science writer Martin Gardner's novel "The Flight of Peter Fromm" may do the trick. In the book, Gardner tells the story of a young fundamentalist and his somewhat torturous journey to free-thinking skepticism.

One other suggestion is for politicians. When they invoke the inclusive nature of American society and go through the litany of welcoming Christians of all denominations, Jews, and Muslims to some event, they should go a step further and welcome people of other religious persuasions as well as nonbelievers.

The number of atheists and agnostics in this country is hard to measure, especially since most of these many millions of Americans don't advertise, but a politician's greater inclusiveness may pay political dividends. It's also the right thing to do.

I bolded the importent parts and frankly I also cut the drek at the end calling for a atheist brokeback mountain, believe it or not most of America doesn't get it's morality from Hollywood, if it did the diviorce rate would be much higher for example. The best thing isn't going to be a bunch of movies, but on the ground education and action. People who've actually met an decent athiest are less likely to hate all athiest. The biggest thing is going to be time. It wasn't all that long ago that we were told that we were locked in a death sturggle with godless communist hordes hell bent on conqearing us and ruining our way of life after all.

From what I can read of this (and I may be getting this wrong) the two highest groups with distrust towards atheist are Asians and Hispainics, in all honesty that doesn't shock me. Most of the Asians who come to the US are traditionalist or religious, more than a few were chased out of their home nations by Athiest Communist movements or Governments, from say Vietnam or China. I think it pretty clear why they would distrust an atheist, even if it's pretty unfair for them to saddle American Athiest for the actions of Chinese rulers. Hispainics in Central America had to deal with communist gureilla movements, FARC in Coloumbia for example makes it a point to shot the priest of any village it takes over last I heard. Although to be fair, FARC isn't really an athiest organziation, it's a criminal movement that makes the mouthings of socalism in order to try to cover the sheer amout of blood it's spilt. Although I wonder about the sample group as Minnesota isn't excaltly know for diverse population (I've yet to met a non-blonde minnesotain but I'm sure they exist... somewhere).

One thing that does hearten me is the fact that only 22% distrust gays and that for racial groups it's pretty low. Accepting the idea that gays are just as American as Johnny the boy down the street who fucks Suzy is a good step towards easing and eventually destorying the civil rights barriers that exist today.

frigidmagi wrote:...but I found an ABC report that covers this in more depth.

I found some interesting points in the report.


(1)First thing first, I wonder about the demographic grouping: it says Asian-Americans, Hispanics, Jews and conservative Christians. The grouping is kinda confusing, because the first three groups are based on ethnicity, while the fourth group (conservative Christians) is based on religious views. Isn't the fourth group supposed to be "White Americans" instead of "conservative Christians", or does the grouping implies that "White Americans" and "conservative Christians" are synonymous?



(2) It seems different people have different reasons regarding to their dislike of atheism. For the Asian-Americans and the Hispanic, the reason is because they fled to the US from the persecution of the Communist regimes.

As for the Christians, what is the reason, then? Is it because American morality has largely been defined by religion, as Penny Edgell said?

Isn't the fourth group supposed to be "White Americans" instead of "conservative Christians", or does the grouping implies that "White Americans" and "conservative Christians" are synonymous?

Well not every White American is a conservative Christian, given that White Americans are the majority in the states, there is little unity of opinion among them. In this case my belief is that conservative Chistian is the polite way of saying fundalmentist.

As for the Christians, what is the reason, then? Is it because American morality has largely been defined by religion, as Penny Edgell said?

Poeple always have different reasons for their actions, even if they are the same actions. For the Christians there's the tradition of the cold war, the recent political struggles and the fact they believe that the Hollywood lifesytle is the result of athiestism.

frigidmagi wrote:Poeple always have different reasons for their actions, even if they are the same actions. For the Christians there's the tradition of the cold war, the recent political struggles and the fact they believe that the Hollywood lifesytle is the result of athiestism.

Really... and here I thought it was scientology...

Hollywood predates Scientology and alot point to the fact that Hollywood figures will flock to even the silliest trendy belief as a side effect of their "godless existence."

frigidmagi wrote:Well not every White American is a conservative Christian, given that White Americans are the majority in the states, there is little unity of opinion among them. In this case my belief is that conservative Chistian is the polite way of saying fundalmentist.

I know. What puzzles me is why they use 'conservative Christians' instead of 'White Americans', because the former three groups (Asian-Americans, Hispanic, and Jews) are ethnicity instead of religious views, so 'conservative Christians' doesn't actually fit in. Or to use Business Intelligence terminology: those groups doesn't belong in the same dimension. It's like 'Ferrari', 'Porsche', 'Lotus', and 'nVidia' being put together.

I wonder if the grouping actually intends to associate 'White Americans' with 'conservative Christians', and if that's the case, then why.

Or maybe the grouping is to emphasize that conservative Christians were extremely rare to be found among the Asian-Americans and the Hispanic? (and of course the Jews.) In fact, from what you have mentioned (and it is very reasonable), the reason why Asian-Americans dislike Atheists is not because religious upbringing nor Christian fundamentalism, but due to the trauma of Communist persecution.

frigidmagi wrote:Poeple always have different reasons for their actions, even if they are the same actions.

Yup. I'm actually interested in the dominant reason, though.

frigidmagi wrote:For the Christians there's the tradition of the cold war,

You mean things like McCarthy -ism and such? But I thought it was more politics instead of religion?

frigidmagi wrote:the recent political struggles

It is the issues like gay marriage, the Pledge of Allegiance (with 'under God' phrase), the banning of Evolution Theory from public schools, and such things, isn't it? I think this could be the most dominant reason, am I correct?

frigidmagi wrote:and the fact they believe that the Hollywood lifesytle is the result of athiestism.

Yup. When browsing Christian websites (or blogs, or boards), it seems they heavily associate 'atheism' with 'immorality'; I get the impression that they believe that Christianity is the only source of morality, so no religion = no morality.

Or maybe this is actually the dominant reason instead of the former?

Or maybe the grouping is to emphasize that conservative Christians were extremely rare to be found among the Asian-Americans and the Hispanic? (and of course the Jews.) In fact, from what you have mentioned (and it is very reasonable), the reason why Asian-Americans dislike Atheists is not because religious upbringing nor Christian fundamentalism, but due to the trauma of Communist persecution.

Actually most Hispainics tends to be fairly conservitive Catholics and of Asians in the US many are Christian of varying sects (example most of the Vietnamese who fled to the US during and after the war were Catholic). However in the US when you say Conservitive Christian the first image that pops into your mind is a Middle Aged, White Male, be it Billy Gram or Jerry Falwell.

You mean things like McCarthy -ism and such? But I thought it was more politics instead of religion?

One thing that seems difficult for non-religious persons to grasp is even with liberal and moderates their religious beliefs are very much tied into their political beliefs and how they live their lives. Christianity isn't a jacket I put on and take off as is convietent for me, it is an esstential part of who I am and how I view the world. For me and millions of other Christians a demenison of the Cold War, in fact for many the overriding demension above all others was the belief that if the Communist won, it would mean the end of our freedom to worship. Now that I think about it, it wasn't just a demension for Christians, but also for muslims within the U.S.S.R and Afghanistan among other places.

Events that took place in the USSR itself and in Eastern Europe and Central Asia only hardened our belief that if the Communist won the Cold War our pastors and priest would be thrown into prision, our churches destoried and our childern taken away to be raised outside of the faith. That belief has not faded over time.

It is the issues like gay marriage, the Pledge of Allegiance (with 'under God' phrase), the banning of Evolution Theory from public schools, and such things, isn't it? I think this could be the most dominant reason, am I correct?

The fact that only 22% in the study mistrust gays makes me think it is not the dominant reason. Although for my part, I can understand why there are some who want Under God removed from the Pledge of Allegiance and I have to admit they have good legal reason for demanding it. The fact that the Under God pharse was added only in the 1950s leds me to the belief that removing it won't end in the destruction of the Republic like some believe.

To be blunt the whole banning of Evolution gets overstated, the schools who are even attempting it are in the minority (Is Kansas really the majority here folks? Is Kansas even really that importent?). Not to say that the idea of banning evolution shouldn't be fought every time it is brought up. It should be, but panic does not help.

Yup. When browsing Christian websites (or blogs, or boards), it seems they heavily associate 'atheism' with 'immorality'; I get the impression that they believe that Christianity is the only source of morality, so no religion = no morality.

Or maybe this is actually the dominant reason instead of the former?

This is certainly possible. Again Hollywood does not help. The lifesytle that Hollywood often presents has being best is frankly in my eyes rather acidic, destructive and empty. I'm no prude, but the extremes to which the Hollywood movers and shakers take Hedonism is immoral enough for me to be reduced to wanting to spit. For exampe I think little Mis Spears 2 day marriage is 5000 times more dangerous to marriage then letting any number of gay men and women marry their same sex partner (note I am not claiming Spears is an athiest, so put down your fucking pitchfork). Another example is the behavior of rock stars or even Paris Hilton, whether or not they are athiest or not, it is widely believed they are.

This is behavior many assoicate with athiestism (it's not to be frank, it's hedomism, which can be done by anyone of any religion, but that's a talk for P&T) instead of their neighbor Frank who is a good guy but for some reason doesn't go to church on Sunday.