Study shows sharp decline in Christians as a percentage of population in U.S.

[jerrywall]

But teen pregnancy is on the decline, significantly, so that's not a real example of anything. The article was clearly trying to paint a correlation between lack of morals and atheism, which is patently false.

Trends in Teen Pregnancy and Childbearing - The Office of Adolescent Health

Then you have stuff like this:
Phil Robertson Of 'Duck Dynasty' Reveals Bizarre Atheist Rape And Murder Fantasy

Or the movie "God's Not Dead", which paints atheists as cruel and angry people. It's all fantasy and confirmation bias, not borne in fact.

I guess I read it differently.

Critics will counter that Oklahoma typically ranks among the top states for church attendance, yet ranks worse on the aforementioned measures than states with lower levels of religious observance. This may suggest some people are hypocrites, but it doesn’t mean Oklahoma would be better off if fewer people adhered to a religion that advocates against murder, adultery and theft. A classroom full of pregnant teenage atheists would still be a sign of societal decay.

They seem to be saying that you can't use the high teen pregnancy rate to attack religion in Oklahoma. Moral decay is moral decay.

[Chadanth]

I guess I read it differently.



They seem to be saying that you can't use the high teen pregnancy rate to attack religion in Oklahoma. Moral decay is moral decay.

Perhaps I read it wrong, but the overall tone is accusatory. I still attribute the high teen pregnancy rate in OK to poor sex education, anyway. I blame the bad sex ed on religious conservatives, too. If the overall rate is down, dramatically so, but it's still high in one of the more religious states, that's pretty damning evidence that we're doing it wrong.

[onthestrip]

It's more than simply poorly delivered, it's full of negative opinions and naked conjecture, none of which is supported by fact. It's a fantasy. It's one thing if the article would have stayed on the community and social value of religion, which most atheists will concede, but veered off into some stupid point about atheist teen pregnancies and atheists providing no community service.

This editorial is probably something that would have been written about gay people 20 years ago. Because back then, with so many in the closet (for appropriate reasons), most people thought they didnt know any gay people. Therefore regualr folks had negative opinions of gay people because they really didnt know who they were or anything about them. Fast forward to today and everyone knows gay people and realizes they are good and normal people. Its the same with atheists. Most atheists are afraid to be open about because of possible negative repercussions. Therefore people think they dont know atheists, even though they do, and dont know that they are good and normal people. This is probably why the recent Openly Secular Day is very important to educate the religious about atheists. They arent as the editors say "do what feels good" people.

I disagree. The statement was simply that a classroom full of pregnant teenage atheists vs a classroom full of pregnant teenage Christians are both equally a sign of societal decay. I'm not sure I can disagree.

Stating that regardless of religion societal decay is societal decay seems like something that would be uncontroversial.

I guess I read it differently.



They seem to be saying that you can't use the high teen pregnancy rate to attack religion in Oklahoma. Moral decay is moral decay.

Picking out teen pregnancy to make a point was incredibly foolish. Seeing how its religious people and their advancement of abstinence only sex education has contributed to more teen pregnancies. It has been shown that it has no effect on rates while fact based sex education has. So why cant you use the teen pregnancy rate to attack religion in Oklahoma when it has contributed to higher rates? Just as across the country the more religious states have higher teen pregnancy rates than less religious states. We should criticize religion when they dont acknowledge real numbers and statistics only because they dont like the alternative methods.

Sure, societal decay is societal decay regardless of religion or no religion. But the worst part of the editorial is how it ignores the fact that you usually see more of it in more religious areas. This is even true across the world.

[jerrywall]

Oh geeze... are we really comparing the plight of gay people to atheism?

As far as I know, gay people don't set up booths and try to convert people to homosexuality, nor do they buy billboards, and hold events meant to mock straight people. And I'm not sure the last time an atheist was tied to the back of a truck and dragged to death.

[onthestrip]

Oh geeze... are we really comparing the plight of gay people to atheism?

As far as I know, gay people don't set up booths and try to convert people to homosexuality, nor do they buy billboards, and hold events meant to mock straight people. And I'm not sure the last time an atheist was tied to the back of a truck and dragged to death.

Dude, nothing was said about the plight of atheists. Im comparing how people seem to be ignorant, frightened or leery of a group of people simply because they dont know them or that they dont realize they know them. Im saying that the more you spend time with someone thats apart of a certain group, whether it be religious, sexual orientation, or socio-economic, you become more understanding and trustworthy of them when you interact with them and come to know them.

[Chadanth]

Oh geeze... are we really comparing the plight of gay people to atheism?

As far as I know, gay people don't set up booths and try to convert people to homosexuality, nor do they buy billboards, and hold events meant to mock straight people. And I'm not sure the last time an atheist was tied to the back of a truck and dragged to death.

I also think it's overkill to make a direct comparison, but people in general do have strong feelings about atheists.

Americans More Likely to Vote for a Cheating, Pot-Smoking or Gay President Over an Atheist One in 2016, Says Study

[jerrywall]

I also think it's overkill to make a direct comparison, but people in general do have strong feelings about atheists.

Americans More Likely to Vote for a Cheating, Pot-Smoking or Gay President Over an Atheist One in 2016, Says Study

Fair enough. I may have been a little "knee jerk" in that reaction, but it certainly irks me. Not being trusted or voted is a far way from the suppression and the violence that other groups have seen.

And it would help if there weren't so many smug and arrogant atheists. They're as bad as the over-evangelical Christians.

"There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."

[Chadanth]

Fair enough. I may have been a little "knee jerk" in that reaction, but it certainly irks me. Not being trusted or voted is a far way from the suppression and the violence that other groups have seen.

And it would help if there weren't so many smug and arrogant atheists. They're as bad as the over-evangelical Christians.

"There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."

I would be fine with that, so long as the other side of the matter keeps itself out of schools and government policy, but they're not content with that.

[jerrywall]

I would be fine with that, so long as the other side of the matter keeps itself out of schools and government policy, but they're not content with that.

Both "sides" represent the minority on their "side".

[Pete]

I would be fine with that, so long as the other side of the matter keeps itself out of schools and government policy, but they're not content with that.

Also, if there is smug backlash it's fueled by a lifetime of being subjected to inescapable religious dogma and being told over and over again that if you didn't believe in a very specific way, you are going to burn in hell and are essentially an inferior human being.

That sort of thing tends to have an effect on people.

[Jersey Boss]

Both "sides" represent the minority on their "side".

This very well could be true Jerry, and I won't dispute it. But one minority side has oversized influence with those who pass laws and set policy.

[jerrywall]

I know. I mean, in just recent times that side was able to force Edmond to remove the cross from the city seal, despite the wishes of the overwhelming majority.

[jerrywall]

Oh wait, you meant the other side... :P

[Jersey Boss]

I know. I mean, in just recent times that side was able to force Edmond to remove the cross from the city seal, despite the wishes of the overwhelming majority.

Hey, when the majority or an outsized minority is imposing an unconstitutional agenda, I stand with the constitution. It seems that the legislature with the blessing of the governor supports passing unconstitutional legislation that is endorsed by the amen crowd.

[jerrywall]

Honestly, I was just being a smart Alec.

[Chadanth]

I know. I mean, in just recent times that side was able to force Edmond to remove the cross from the city seal, despite the wishes of the overwhelming majority.

Yeah, I don't know where the line should be. I'm not sure I'm comfortable with suing to remove every religious symbol from public property, and I fail to see how anyone is injured by a cross on the city seal. Of course, I don't want religion pushed in public schools, and I don't want bibles handed out at schools. I don't mind prayer at city council meetings. I don't want my tax dollars funding nativity scenes on the town square, but I'm fine with some religious group leasing the land to have their own display, as long as it's open to any group. I think both sides take it too far at times.

[bchris02]

Yeah, I don't know where the line should be. I'm not sure I'm comfortable with suing to remove every religious symbol from public property, and I fail to see how anyone is injured by a cross on the city seal. Of course, I don't want religion pushed in public schools, and I don't want bibles handed out at schools. I don't mind prayer at city council meetings. I don't want my tax dollars funding nativity scenes on the town square, but I'm fine with some religious group leasing the land to have their own display, as long as it's open to any group. I think both sides take it too far at times.

I think the line is pretty easy to define.

If the religious symbolism is part of the history of a place or has some cultural significance, it should be allowed. If it's for proselytizing or to make a political statement ala the Ten Commandments monument at the OK state capital, it should not be allowed.

[jerrywall]

What's the saying? Complex problems resist simple solutions?

[Architect2010]

Also, if there is smug backlash it's fueled by a lifetime of being subjected to inescapable religious dogma and being told over and over again that if you didn't believe in a very specific way, you are going to burn in hell and are essentially an inferior human being.

That sort of thing tends to have an effect on people.

This. Funny enough, it reminds me of a time I was in LB's Centennial Plaza when I was 17. I was hanging with some friends outside of Sonic after a movie when we were approached by another group of teens our age. They basically surrounded us and sat at our table. Within moments of exchanging handshakes and hello's, we were all being preached at. Not only were we being preached to, and they had apparently been out there all night doing this, but one of the kids had the audacity to tell me, "That if one more person tells him they don't believe in God, he was going to punch them in the face." Well he didn't realize he was speaking to an agnostic... Across the table another teen is telling my two Southern Baptist friends that their version of Christianity is wrong and encouraging them to find the right path! Well you can only imagine how livid we all were, basically being mission-jumped while we're out enjoying our Friday, and told that the way we believe is WRONG, and apparently if we didn't agree we were either incompetent, or would be "punched in the face". Needless to say we not-so-kindly told them to leave us alone... That night I saw first-hand how intolerant and SMUG some religious people are. Not only to non-believers but to people that don't share the same denomination as them!

When I was at Southeast High school at about 18, my AP US History teacher asked us how many of us were Agnostic/Athiest. Out of a group of about 25 students, about 7-9 of us rose our hands. She was also surprised by the amount of non-believers, although for a while I had already assumed that was the case among my generation.

I find it intriguing that a larger percentage of the population, especially the younger generations, are leaning towards no affiliation or athiest. I had always wondered what may cause such a shift. Obviously technology and Science is a huge part of it, but I wonder how much? Obviously my memories aren't 100% but I've always detested church, even as a very young child before I was exposed to the logic of Science. Maybe in our early childhoods before we have a concept of 'self', our life experiences dictate how we view this world. With kids exposed to computers, cell phones, TV, music, popular culture before they can develop a sense of self or sense of spirituality, it's no wonder that a lot of them identify with a more "modern" approach towards religion.

[Jersey Boss]

Honestly, I was just being a smart Alec.

Nod & a smile.

[MsProudSooner]

I stole this from the Faith in Humanity thread. This little boy is a shining example of a 'good Christian'. If more people were like him, I suspect there wouldn't be a decline in people who identify themselves as Christians.

CNN)Faced with a homeless man standing outside a restaurant, what would you do? And what do you tell your children if they ask why he's standing out there?

Ava Faulk of Prattville, Alabama, knew what to tell her 5-year-old son a few weeks ago.

Faulk and her son, Josiah Duncan, were eating dinner at a local Waffle House when they spotted a man with his bike holding a bag outside the restaurant.

Noticing that the man wasn't clean, Josiah started doing what children do: asking his mom a lot of questions.

"He's homeless," Faulk told her son, according to CNN affiliate WSFA. But Josiah didn't know what that meant.

"Well, that means he doesn't have a home," Faulk said.

Faulk said he was most troubled by the fact that the man looked hungry.

She sent an email about her son's reaction to WSFA, which featured him in a "Making a difference" segment.

Josiah told his mother that she should buy the man a meal, which she agreed to do.

"He came in and sat down, and nobody really waited on him," Faulk told WSFA. "Josiah jumped up and asked him if he needed a menu because you can't order without one."

While the man started out by choosing a low-cost burger, they told him to order whatever he wanted. "Can I have bacon?" was his question, Faulk said. "I told him get as much bacon you want."

That's when Josiah brought the restaurant to tears.

"I wanted to say the blessing with him," he said.

With 11 other patrons in the restaurant, Josiah started to sing: "God our Father, God our Father, we thank you, we thank you, for our many blessings, for our many blessings, amen, amen."

"The man cried. I cried. Everybody cried," Faulk said.

The man went on his way shortly thereafter, but Faulk says the gifts she got from his visit will remain with her.

"You never know who the angel on Earth is, and when the opportunity comes you should never walk away from it," Faulk said in her email to WSFA. "Watching my son touch the 11 people in that Waffle House tonight will be forever one of the greatest accomplishments as a parent I'll ever get to witness."

Parents whose kids are curious about such issues can tell them an age-appropriate version of the truth and take direct action, as Faulk did with her son.

Another option is to carry snacks or bags with nonperishable food and toiletries in the car to hand out to people on the roadside when the need arises. A deeper commitment would be volunteering in a local soup kitchen or food bank and tackling the problem of homelessness and hunger in a more sustained way.