Study: Religious belief can cause damage to a society

[The Man]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...798944,00.html

The Times, England: "RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high murder rates, abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide, according to research published today.

According to the study, belief in and worship of God are not only unnecessary for a healthy society but may actually contribute to social problems.

The study counters the view of believers that religion is necessary to provide the moral and ethical foundations of a healthy society.

It compares the social peformance of relatively secular countries, such as Britain, with the US, where the majority believes in a creator rather than the theory of evolution. Many conservative evangelicals in the US consider Darwinism to be a social evil, believing that it inspires atheism and amorality.

Many liberal Christians and believers of other faiths hold that religious belief is socially beneficial, believing that it helps to lower rates of violent crime, murder, suicide, sexual promiscuity and abortion. The benefits of religious belief to a society have been described as its “spiritual capital”. But the study claims that the devotion of many in the US may actually contribute to its ills.

The paper, published in the Journal of Religion and Society, a US academic journal, reports: “Many Americans agree that their churchgoing nation is an exceptional, God-blessed, shining city on the hill that stands as an impressive example for an increasingly sceptical world.

“In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion in the prosperous democracies.

“The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developing democracies, sometimes spectacularly so.”

Gregory Paul, the author of the study and a social scientist, used data from the International Social Survey Programme, Gallup and other research bodies to reach his conclusions.

He compared social indicators such as murder rates, abortion, suicide and teenage pregnancy.

The study concluded that the US was the world’s only prosperous democracy where murder rates were still high, and that the least devout nations were the least dysfunctional. Mr Paul said that rates of gonorrhoea in adolescents in the US were up to 300 times higher than in less devout democratic countries. The US also suffered from “ uniquely high” adolescent and adult syphilis infection rates, and adolescent abortion rates, the study suggested.

Mr Paul said: “The study shows that England, despite the social ills it has, is actually performing a good deal better than the USA in most indicators, even though it is now a much less religious nation than America.”

He said that the disparity was even greater when the US was compared with other countries, including France, Japan and the Scandinavian countries. These nations had been the most successful in reducing murder rates, early mortality, sexually transmitted diseases and abortion, he added.

Mr Paul delayed releasing the study until now because of Hurricane Katrina. He said that the evidence accumulated by a number of different studies suggested that religion might actually contribute to social ills. “I suspect that Europeans are increasingly repelled by the poor societal performance of the Christian states,” he added.

He said that most Western nations would become more religious only if the theory of evolution could be overturned and the existence of God scientifically proven. Likewise, the theory of evolution would not enjoy majority support in the US unless there was a marked decline in religious belief, Mr Paul said.

“The non-religious, proevolution democracies contradict the dictum that a society cannot enjoy good conditions unless most citizens ardently believe in a moral creator.

“The widely held fear that a Godless citizenry must experience societal disaster is therefore refuted.”

Be nice to each other in responding to this one, please.

[DarkLadyNyara]

“Many Americans agree that their churchgoing nation is an exceptional, God-blessed, shining city on the hill that stands as an impressive example for an increasingly sceptical world.

Cue me falling out laughing.

“The non-religious, proevolution democracies contradict the dictum that a society cannot enjoy good conditions unless most citizens ardently believe in a moral creator.

“The widely held fear that a Godless citizenry must experience societal disaster is therefore refuted.”

About time. Of course, theres no way that would make it into mainstream America. It would be interesting to study why religion has that effect.

[bipper]

I look at this, and a blank gets drawn.

It really seems to make no sence, prolly written by a stonghardt atheist or somthing. I look at this particular paragraph:

Many liberal Christians and believers of other faiths hold that religious belief is socially beneficial, believing that it helps to lower rates of violent crime, murder, suicide, sexual promiscuity and abortion. The benefits of religious belief to a society have been described as its “spiritual capital”. But the study claims that the devotion of many in the US may actually contribute to its ills.

The author goes out of his way to name off Christians. If anyone who was actually doing this study new a lick about Christianity, they would know that the core phiolosiphy of the religon is base on love and peace. Kill your enemy with kindness", "Love thy neighbor", and the whole God taking a mortal death to display obidence and servitude is greater than violence and retribution in the end. (Now I mean spiritually, not physically. As Jesus did die, and most would not mark that up as a win, the whole ressurection is part of the victory)

This whole article seems totally off, and to me, it serves as a blow to the credibility of whomever wrote this. I mean, the whole thing seem like it was written with an extreme bias. Read it carefully, and just try and blame every factor on a religon. Higher STD rates being blamed on religon? Yeah, cause Christianity really tells you to go sleep around :rolleyes2

Ugh, I can't belive this got published.

Bipper

[edczxcvbnm]

How was this study conducted is what I want to know. Did they just look at stats as a whole from nations or did they get into actual specific communities in each nation and conduct polls in each one.

I think religion has no part in this and it is just a social problem. Religion does not lead to these things but society itself does through media among other things. We all know the Italian mob is a murderous bunch but low and behold they believe and all of that stuff. Yet there are just as many who do believe that follow it. It is more of a cultural thing for the most part and that religion doesn't acutally play a big part in it at all.

[DarkLadyNyara]

The author goes out of his way to name off Christians.

Gee, could that be because it's the majority religion?

[The Man]

I look at this, and a blank gets drawn.

It really seems to make no sence, prolly written by a stonghardt atheist or somthing.

We should point out that the person who wrote the article is just repeating the findings of the study, which are that certain social ills are more common in places that have strong religious beliefs.

I look at this particular paragraph:

Many liberal Christians and believers of other faiths hold that religious belief is socially beneficial, believing that it helps to lower rates of violent crime, murder, suicide, sexual promiscuity and abortion. The benefits of religious belief to a society have been described as its “spiritual capital”. But the study claims that the devotion of many in the US may actually contribute to its ills.

The author goes out of his way to name off Christians. If anyone who was actually doing this study new a lick about Christianity, they would know that the core phiolosiphy of the religon is base on love and peace. Kill your enemy with kindness", "Love thy neighbor", and the whole God taking a mortal death to display obidence and servitude is greater than violence and retribution in the end. (Now I mean spiritually, not physically. As Jesus did die, and most would not mark that up as a win, the whole ressurection is part of the victory)

Many strands of modern Christianity have very little to do with Jesus' actual teachings. Does it strike you as odd that many of the most gung-ho war supporters in America are also hardcore religious believers? Many of the most religious areas in the United States are also the most prone to teen pregnancies and the like. Not to mention the bombing of abortion clinics and the like.

This whole article seems totally off, and to me, it serves as a blow to the credibility of whomever wrote this. I mean, the whole thing seem like it was written with an extreme bias. Read it carefully, and just try and blame every factor on a religon. Higher STD rates being blamed on religon? Yeah, cause Christianity really tells you to go sleep around :rolleyes2

Obviously they're not saying religion tells you to go do certain behaviours, but the study found that those behaviours are more common in religious areas regardless. Clearly, this is in strong dispute with the oft-repeated mantra that religion helps to lower the incidence of such behaviours.

[edczxcvbnm]

Oops. I also wanted to know how each community was selected if such an occurance actually happened. With out doing these things I consider the study 100% crap. They didn't dig deep enough into social morals and how socialist each government is and what each society places a high value in. There are too many other factors that are never even brought up for me to consider this study anything but crap...or at least mention of.

[bipper]

Gee, could that be because it's the majority religion?

Could be, but why jump out kicking and flayiling at christians? Seems like it was done to stir up the 'controverse side' of this article. Anything that reaches for atention, looses credibility in my book.

We should point out that the person who wrote the article is just repeating the findings of the study, which are that certain social ills are more common in places that have strong religious beliefs.

We should also point out that they did *write* the article and there for ARE liable of its symantical meaning.

Many strands of modern Christianity have very little to do with Jesus' actual teachings. Does it strike you as odd that many of the most gung-ho war supporters in America are also hardcore religious believers? Many of the most religious areas in the United States are also the most prone to teen pregnancies and the like. Not to mention the bombing of abortion clinics and the like.

Assuming that opening statment is true, then they would not be Christians. No, it does not strike me odd as most people whom have religously enforced morals are gung-ho war supporters in the wake of such wars as Iraw, and world war II. Does it supprise you that morals create a stronger drive for wars than political reasons? The same can stand true for the abortion clinics.

As for the higher rates of teen pregnancies, that just seems completley wrong. I could see it, as being teens are rebellious against thier upbringings and going on such things as adolessence. From my experience, there are a lot more teen pregnecies popping up in the ghettos and slummy areas of this country, and other countries. As per this is actually a fact, edczxcvbnm brings up a good point on religons. Its one thing to claim to study them, its another to follow them.

Obviously they're not saying religion tells you to go do certain behaviours, but the study found that those behaviours are more common in religious areas regardless. Clearly, this is in strong dispute with the oft-repeated mantra that religion helps to lower the incidence of such behaviours.

well, if one does not practice a religion, can you say they are seriously of that religon, or religous? I don't see how this study really holds any credibility when its opening statment is "RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high murder rates, abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide, according to research published today." Look at it carfully, that alone makes not a lick of sence. They say the the RELIGOUS BELIEFS cause these actions...nicely done. *bravo*

This study needs to be looked at more closley, as it seems to have a conception based on starting controversy.

Bipper

[The Summoner of Leviathan]

I think since he using only one country he really is not justifying anything, he uses other countries to show contrast, yet he uses none to support what he is saying about the US. Couldn't someone as easily did the same thing, but twisted the argument the other way and use the Vatican City for an example country?

[Jebus]

well, if one does not practice a religion, can you say they are seriously of that religon, or religous? I don't see how this study really holds any credibility when its opening statment is "RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high murder rates, abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide, according to research published today." Look at it carfully, that alone makes not a lick of sence. They say the the RELIGOUS BELIEFS cause these actions...nicely done. *bravo*



Bipper

"RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society"

Can. Not does.

I agree with a lot of things in this article. Religion tends to breed close-mindedness. Heavily religious people tend to see the world as "I'm right, and the rest of those godless heathens are wrong." This in turn leads to violence, and other violent crime.

Religion also breeds a kind of "sheep" instinct in people. Once they're pacified enough by their religion, they will believe just about anybody who comes along claiming to be speaking in the name of their respective god(s). Which once again can lead to violence.

As for the sexuality thing, I think that partially comes from the person's desire to distance themselves from their parents. Pretty much ever teenager wants to be different, especially from their parents, so they'll start doing things their parents said not to do, hence the sex. Although this part is a little more hazy than the violent parts.

All I know is that religion is a serious hindrance to learning and free thought, due to its "Believe me, god damnit" outlook. And I do feel that it is a problem for a civilized society. A kind of throwback to our ancient roots for whenever we couldn't figure something out, a "god" did it. You'd think that in a reasonably intelligent society (hahaha, I know, just bear with me here) that we could just dispose of such an idea, and move to more rational ideas. Religion is not needed for a moral basis. It's irrational to just harm somebody, or to rape somebody, or to steal. Just because someone's an athiest doesn't mean their immoral. Religion is a completely uselss construct meant to give certain people more power over the weak minded.

And, for fun, I'll end on a quote by Voltaire. "Those who can make you believe in absurdities can make you commit atrocities."

[lordblazer]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...798944,00.html

The Times, England: "RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high murder rates, abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide, according to research published today.

According to the study, belief in and worship of God are not only unnecessary for a healthy society but may actually contribute to social problems.

The study counters the view of believers that religion is necessary to provide the moral and ethical foundations of a healthy society.

It compares the social peformance of relatively secular countries, such as Britain, with the US, where the majority believes in a creator rather than the theory of evolution. Many conservative evangelicals in the US consider Darwinism to be a social evil, believing that it inspires atheism and amorality.

Many liberal Christians and believers of other faiths hold that religious belief is socially beneficial, believing that it helps to lower rates of violent crime, murder, suicide, sexual promiscuity and abortion. The benefits of religious belief to a society have been described as its “spiritual capital”. But the study claims that the devotion of many in the US may actually contribute to its ills.

The paper, published in the Journal of Religion and Society, a US academic journal, reports: “Many Americans agree that their churchgoing nation is an exceptional, God-blessed, shining city on the hill that stands as an impressive example for an increasingly sceptical world.

“In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion in the prosperous democracies.

“The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developing democracies, sometimes spectacularly so.”

Gregory Paul, the author of the study and a social scientist, used data from the International Social Survey Programme, Gallup and other research bodies to reach his conclusions.

He compared social indicators such as murder rates, abortion, suicide and teenage pregnancy.

The study concluded that the US was the world’s only prosperous democracy where murder rates were still high, and that the least devout nations were the least dysfunctional. Mr Paul said that rates of gonorrhoea in adolescents in the US were up to 300 times higher than in less devout democratic countries. The US also suffered from “ uniquely high” adolescent and adult syphilis infection rates, and adolescent abortion rates, the study suggested.

Mr Paul said: “The study shows that England, despite the social ills it has, is actually performing a good deal better than the USA in most indicators, even though it is now a much less religious nation than America.”

He said that the disparity was even greater when the US was compared with other countries, including France, Japan and the Scandinavian countries. These nations had been the most successful in reducing murder rates, early mortality, sexually transmitted diseases and abortion, he added.

Mr Paul delayed releasing the study until now because of Hurricane Katrina. He said that the evidence accumulated by a number of different studies suggested that religion might actually contribute to social ills. “I suspect that Europeans are increasingly repelled by the poor societal performance of the Christian states,” he added.

He said that most Western nations would become more religious only if the theory of evolution could be overturned and the existence of God scientifically proven. Likewise, the theory of evolution would not enjoy majority support in the US unless there was a marked decline in religious belief, Mr Paul said.

“The non-religious, proevolution democracies contradict the dictum that a society cannot enjoy good conditions unless most citizens ardently believe in a moral creator.

“The widely held fear that a Godless citizenry must experience societal disaster is therefore refuted.”

Be nice to each other in responding to this one, please.

lol Yet another angry atheist writes a letter how America invovles religion within its government(which it doesn't).

Science, and technological innovation would've never happened without religion.

Thats the problem I have with atheist. They exclude something and it isn't all atheist just the bastards who have time on their hands to complain via article style. I mean dang... get over it move on with your life.

Also WTF? does murder rates and the USA being devout have to do with why religion hurts society? USA has high murder rates because we give ordinary citizens the right to bare arms. I mean from AK-47 to the D.Eagle fromt here to the Uzi from that to the .50 caliber rifles. I mean heck you can buy a M16 Rifle.

What does that have to do with the hypothesis that religion hurts society.

Such a bias eassay. Well a crappy one I would say. Compared two things htat had no relations with each other? i didn't know religion advocated go kill pepole./

Very few people in the USA has murdered someone due to religious composition due to that fact that religion is part of our private lives.........

Anyway this "study" was just too extreme on one side or the other and showed no balance nor moderation and a weak thesis.

I didn't know by my church according to this article causes more violence. I mean we set up church in the most violent neiborhoods. thats what most churches in major cities do!!!! why? to help!!!! I mean thats were the chruches needs to be in chrisstainity. The whole point of christainity is helping your fellow man, and the community, and how to live. Christainity strongly I mean strongly stresses contributing to society..

No the authur did go out of his way to say it. I just wanted to get my 2 cents in on his opinions. Bah my head hurts from the ty extremnism.

The author goes out of his way to name off Christians.

Gee, could that be because it's the majority religion?

theres Islam,Scientology,there is also buddhism and hinduism and no one talks crap about
why the hell does hinduism have a caste system? But yeah lets bash on christains.


I mean come on this type of mind thought is pathetic. Christainity is always talked down about becuase of hte crusades. Were European leaders hid behind a religion to gain power,land,and wealth for their own greed. The Islams did the exact same and evetually the two groups met and boom the crusade wars. When can people get there head out their butts and study some world history besides Europe,america,middle east,.. I mean study for once look back for once.

thats another 50 cents in...

[bipper]

"RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society"

Can. Not does.

yes, fall on that one little word, to make the article sound safe. That is why I refeared to the articles symantical value. The author acts in a way to make political correctness seem important to him, then he gougess nearly baseless facts into the article.

I agree with a lot of things in this article. Religion tends to breed close-mindedness. Heavily religious people tend to see the world as "I'm right, and the rest of those godless heathens are wrong." This in turn leads to violence, and other violent crime.

Religon by no means creatse closed mindedness. Beliveing outside the realm of what simple science tells us is far from it. Those with belifs, granted, are usually a bit close minded to the beliefs of others, but this seems like a hypocritical stand point for an out spoken athiest.

With me, it is not the "Godless heathens" that are wrong, it is thouse whom live a corrupt life, much as you would probally say is evil, I am sure. The teachings of Jesus, are very prone to find the peaceful solution, and yet there were plenty of wars using the lords name in vain. It is not the religon, or its influence on people. It has, and will always be peoples corrupt influence on a religon.

Religion also breeds a kind of "sheep" instinct in people. Once they're pacified enough by their religion, they will believe just about anybody who comes along claiming to be speaking in the name of their respective god(s). Which once again can lead to violence.

You can really say this about any government or any assembly that needs leadership. People will follow a cause they feel is just, or are comfortable with (on synominous with thier ideals). Thus rendering this argument completley useless. Also, the sheep analoogy is kinda humerous, as it is used alot in Christianity. Not to say that your metephor shares the same with Jesus's. (Hilarious, I mistyped Jebus there) lol

All I know is that religion is a serious hindrance to learning and free thought, due to its "Believe me, god damnit" outlook. And I do feel that it is a problem for a civilized society. A kind of throwback to our ancient roots for whenever we couldn't figure something out, a "god" did it. You'd think that in a reasonably intelligent society (hahaha, I know, just bear with me here) that we could just dispose of such an idea, and move to more rational ideas. Religion is not needed for a moral basis. It's irrational to just harm somebody, or to rape somebody, or to steal. Just because someone's an athiest doesn't mean their immoral. Religion is a completely uselss construct meant to give certain people more power over the weak minded.

I say the same for science. It is, afterall, a near religon for the faithless. There is no "belive me, god damnit" outlook to religon. It is a way of life that requires faith, but to put it in such a primal manner is just insulting. I see more hostility in the anti religous banterings of athiests than any peice for religon. For every slander that throw on religon, there is an equal slander to any ladder of power.

And, for fun, I'll end on a quote by Voltaire. "Those who can make you believe in absurdities can make you commit atrocities."

I will end with a verse followed by my own quote: "For God sent his son into the world, not to condemn, but that the world might be saved through him" If only other idealistics were that peaceful in conveying thier ideas.

[The Man]

I'm on a break in class so I don't have time to respond to everything in this thread. I'll post more later.

Could be, but why jump out kicking and flayiling at christians? Seems like it was done to stir up the 'controverse side' of this article. Anything that reaches for atention, looses credibility in my book.

Because Christians are by far the most dominant religion in these areas.

We should also point out that they did *write* the article and there for ARE liable of its symantical meaning.

Er. What?

Assuming that opening statment is true, then they would not be Christians. No, it does not strike me odd as most people whom have religously enforced morals are gung-ho war supporters in the wake of such wars as Iraw, and world war II. Does it supprise you that morals create a stronger drive for wars than political reasons? The same can stand true for the abortion clinics.

it's fine for you to have your judgment that they're not following the principles of what Christianity is supposed to be, and in point of fact I agree with you. However, it is still a direct result of organized religion.

As for the higher rates of teen pregnancies, that just seems completley wrong. I could see it, as being teens are rebellious against thier upbringings and going on such things as adolessence. From my experience, there are a lot more teen pregnecies popping up in the ghettos and slummy areas of this country, and other countries. As per this is actually a fact, edczxcvbnm brings up a good point on religons. Its one thing to claim to study them, its another to follow them.

well, here's an old thread about the occurrence of teen pregnancies in red states. As red states tend to be the most heavily religious, it's pretty much interchangeable.

well, if one does not practice a religion, can you say they are seriously of that religon, or religous? I don't see how this study really holds any credibility when its opening statment is "RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high murder rates, abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide, according to research published today." Look at it carfully, that alone makes not a lick of sence. They say the the RELIGOUS BELIEFS cause these actions...nicely done. *bravo*

They're not saying they cause the actions, they're saying those actions are highest in areas where self-identified religious belief is highest. Correlation does not imply correlation, and all the study concludes is that it *may* be a contributing factor. Read the article again.

This study needs to be looked at more closley, as it seems to have a conception based on starting controversy.

It looks to me like people are looking at the study and attributing meanings to it which it does not actually imply so they can dismiss it in an attempt to make themselves feel more comfortable.

Science, and technological innovation would've never happened without religion.

Er. What? It was the Catholic Church that excommunicated Galileo because he dared to suggest that the world revolved around the Sun. It's in the name of religion that people today still insist on ignoring evolution, global warning and other scientific facts. Yeah, chalk another one up for religion alright, science is sure better off because of it.

yes, fall on that one little word, to make the article sound safe. That is why I refeared to the articles symantical value. The author acts in a way to make political correctness seem important to him, then he gougess nearly baseless facts into the article.

He doesn't present them as facts, he presents them as conclusions in a study. And, how are they "baseless"? There seems to be a preponderance of evidence pointing to exactly those conclusions.

I say the same for science. It is, afterall, a near religon for the faithless. There is no "belive me, god damnit" outlook to religon. It is a way of life that requires faith, but to put it in such a primal manner is just insulting. I see more hostility in the anti religous banterings of athiests than any peice for religon. For every slander that throw on religon, there is an equal slander to any ladder of power.

There is no "believe me, god damn it" element to religion? That's funny, all the religious people around have a "Believe in God or you're a dirty sinner and you're going to hell" attitude. And science has a preponderance of evidence pointing to its conclusions and the fact that we've been able to use it to do things that would have been impossible without it makes it pretty much invaluable.

Also, I've never read any atheist writings anywhere near as hostile as some of the stuff I've come out of so-called "religious" institutions. Here's an example.

More later.

[udsuna]

Oh, THIS guy. He's been around for ever bashing christianity every way he can. No one in the social science community even takes him seriously. Once, a classmate of mine brought in this article of his, and the teacher actually LAUGHED. She said, and I quote, "I know him personally, and he has this talent of taking one truth, one half-truth, and then drawing a completely unrelated conclusion from it."

The woman's had PhDs in sociology, psychology and theology for the last 30 years. She was teaching a year as a hiatus of sorts. "Slacking off" as she put it. I'll take her word for it.

Now, this social article fails to take into account several things. FIRST of all, social decay seems to be a trend in all societies that are developing technologically. Violence/etc. occures just as much in "atheist" countries. (The USSR when it stood, China, various other places in Asia, etc.) You tell me CHINA doesn't have a high violent crime rate, and I'll laugh in your face.

It's about access to wealth. As they say: power corrupts. The creation of social strata of varying power. All religion does is get in the way of social change on occasions, which bogs down the evolution of a culture, but it doesn't contribute to amoral behavior. Except, appearantly, with Catholic Priests... but even that's a matter of "those with power vs. those without".

Also, the degradation of personal responsibility, as generated by concepts such as "affirmative action".... seem to hurt the social strata. But that's another debate all together.

[Shadow Nexus]

Eh...this is stupid. You see, criminality rates are not determined by religion, but by the language spoken.

A-HAH! How have I arrived to such conclusion?

Easy, I have found out Spanish makes people criminals. To do this, I have compared the criminality rates of Colombia with those of countries that don't speak Spanish, like Monaco, Vatican City, Samoa and Gambia. Obviously, the fact Colombia has more criminality has to do with Spanish language. Nothing to do with the fact it's one of the major producers of drug, or with it's corrupt goverment, or with the mafias. No, no, it's Spanish language.

Wow, I am a genious. Can I get my study published on an important web site and see people actually taking me seriously?