{"id":193,"date":"2015-11-07T16:56:33","date_gmt":"2015-11-07T21:56:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/l-stires.com\/thinking-slowly\/?p=193"},"modified":"2015-11-08T12:52:29","modified_gmt":"2015-11-08T17:52:29","slug":"more-bad-news-for-religion","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/l-stires.com\/thinking-slowly\/more-bad-news-for-religion\/","title":{"rendered":"More Bad News for Religion"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>In May, I reported on<\/a>\u00a0the Pew Research Center\u2019s 2014 Religious Landscape Study, a survey of a quota sample of 35,000 adults, with a margin of error of plus or minus .6%. The first installment of their results<\/a> concentrated on the size and demographic characteristics of various religious groups. The big news was that Americans with no religious affiliation (the \u201cnones\u201d) increased from 16% in 2007 to 23% in 2014, while those calling themselves Christians dropped from 78% to 71%. The biggest increase in the percentage of nones occurred among Milennials\u2014people born after 1980.\n

Pew has published a second installment of results<\/a> from the survey, focusing on religious beliefs and practices. The share of Americans who say they believe in God has declined from 92% in 2007 to 89% in 2014, while\u00a0those who claim to be \u201cabsolutely certain\u201d that God exists dropped from 71% to 63%. These declines are most pronounced among younger adults. This chart breaks down a number of superstitious beliefs and practices by age. All of them\u00a0have declined since 2007.<\/p>\n

$\"in-many-ways-younger-americans-are-less-religious-than-older-americans\"$ <\/a><\/p>\n

Pew\u00a0also looked at the political beliefs<\/a> of religious and nonreligious participants. Acceptance of homosexuality has increased dramatically among both religious and nonreligious participants, while support for abortion is relatively unchanged. For the first time, the nones are now the largest single group (28%) among Democrats. Evangelical Protestants are the largest group (38%) of Republicans. Not surprisingly given their political affiliations, religious people are more likely than nones to oppose government aid to the poor, to oppose stricter environmental regulations, and to see increased immigration as a change for the worse. Belief in evolution differs sharply between affiliated (55%) and nonaffiliated people (82%), and is nearly universal among atheists (95%) and agnostics (96%).<\/p>\n

By and large, Americans see religion as a force for good<\/a> in the society. Eighty-nine percent say that churches \u201cbring people together and strengthen community bonds,\u201d 87% say they \u201cplay an important role in helping the poor and needy,\u201d and 75% say they \u201cprotect and strengthen morality in society.\u201d However, some of these claims are becoming harder to defend in light of recent research. There is strong evidence that American religious people are higher in racism<\/a> than nonreligious Americans. A recent study looks at some related moral behaviors.<\/p>\n

Altruism<\/a> refers to behavior that benefits others at some cost to oneself. Although there are studies that suggest that religious people report more charitable giving than nonreligious people, these self-reports are suspect<\/a> since religious people are more likely to engage in socially desirable responding<\/a>\u2013a tendency to over-report one\u2019s good behavior and under-report the bad.\u00a0On the other hand, the research is fairly clear that religious people are more punitive<\/a> in their evaluations of bad\u00a0behavior than nonreligious people. For example, religiously affiliated whites are more likely to support the death penalty<\/a> than unaffiliated whites. (Large majorities of black and Hispanic Americans oppose the death penalty regardless of religious affiliation.)<\/p>\n

Dr. Jean Decety of the University of Chicago and his colleagues<\/a> studied moral behavior among a broad and diverse sample of 1,170 children aged 5-12 in six countries (Canada, China, Jordan, South Africa, Turkey, and the US). Children were assigned to the religious affiliation reported by their parents. They were 24% Christian, 43% Muslim, and 28% nonreligious. Other religions were not reported often enough to include in the statistical analysis.<\/p>\n

Altruism was measured using the Dictator Game<\/a>, in which children were allowed to divide an attractive resource\u2014in this case, ten stickers\u2014between themselves a\u00a0peer. The measure is the number of stickers shared with others. Religiously affiliated children were less generous<\/a> than nonaffiliated children, with no significant difference in generosity between Christians and Muslims. Importantly, the negative association between religion and altruism was greater among the older children (aged 8-12), suggesting that as children come to understand their family\u2019s beliefs better, the differences between those from religious and nonreligious families increase.<\/p>\n

$\"decety\"$ <\/a><\/p>\n

To measure punitiveness<\/a>, the authors had children watch videos depicting mild interpersonal harms and asked them to evaluate the \u201cmeanness\u201d of the behavior and to suggest a level of punishment for the perpetrator. Religious children saw these behaviors as more \u201cmean\u201d and suggested greater\u00a0punishment than nonreligious children. Muslim children evaluated the behaviors more negatively than Christian children.<\/p>\n

The authors also asked the parents of these children to rate them<\/a> on empathy and sensitivity to justice. In contrast to the actual behavior of the children, the religious parents rated their children as higher in empathy than the nonreligious parents. They also rated their children as more sensitive to justice. This could be another instance of socially desirable responding by the religious parents.<\/p>\n

If these results, as well as the differences in\u00a0prejudice and discrimination, were more widely known, people might be less likely to see religion as a force for good in society and less likely to favor exempting religious institutions from taxation.<\/p>\n

You may also be interested in reading:<\/strong><\/p>\n

And Then There Were Nones<\/a><\/p>\n

Power and Corruption, Part 1<\/a><\/p>\n<\/body>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"