New research: Raising children without religion may be a better alternative.

[1monster]

http://www.bustle.com/articles/62411-raising-children-without-religion-may-be-a-better-alternative-suggests-new-research?utm_source=FBTraffic&utm_medium=fijifrost&utm_campaign=CMfacebook&ts_pid=2

[div class="excerpt"
[div class="excerpt"Far from being dysfunctional, nihilistic and rudderless without the security and rectitude of religion,” writes Zuckerman, “secular households provide a sound and solid foundation for children, according to Vern Bengston, a USC professor of gerontology and sociology.” Bengston oversees an ongoing study called the Longitudinal Study of Generations, the largest study of families and their religious affiliations in America. After noticing an uptick in nonreligious households, Bengston added secularism to his study in 2013. “Many nonreligious parents were more coherent and passionate about their ethical principles than some of the ‘religious’ parents in our study,” said Bengston in an interview with Zuckerman. “The vast majority appeared to live goal-filled lives characterized by moral direction and sense of life having a purpose.”

L“Many nonreligious parents were more coherent and passionate about their ethical principles than some of the ‘religious’ parents in our study,” said Bengston in an interview with Zuckerman. “The vast majority appeared to live goal-filled lives characterized by moral direction and sense of life having a purpose.”

“For secular people, morality is predicated on one simple principle: empathetic reciprocity, widely known as the Golden Rule. Treating other people as you would like to be treated. It is an ancient, universal ethical imperative. And it requires no supernatural beliefs.”

And check this out: according to Zuckerman, atheists “were almost absent from our prison population as of the late 1990s,” accounting for less than half of one percent of inmates according to reports by the Federal Bureau of Prisons. “This echoes what the criminology field has documented for more than a century,” he writes, “the unaffiliated and the nonreligious engage in far fewer crimes.”

Additionally, a troublesome report from BBC last year found that religious children were less likely than their non-religious peers to distinguish fantasy from reality, based on a study conducted by Boston University. Presented with realistic, religious, and fantastical stories, children were then asked whether they thought the story was real or fictional. Researchers found that “[c]hildren with a religious upbringing tended to view the protagonists in religious stories as real, whereas children from non-religious households saw them as fictional.” And why is this problematic? Because it muddies the waters of a child’s differentiation between reality and fiction, says the study, and even the spiritual from the fantastical.

[elleng]

1. Sure is.

Encourages children to do their OWN thinking. Mine surely have.

[sundevil2000]

71. I was raised in the Catholic Church. I went to 13 years of Catholic school.

I started to "think on my own" when I was 18 and going to university.

I don't find anything wrong with instilling a religion in a child...there are many more years in their life when they can choose their own path.

[elleng]

73. My husband was raised in the Catholic Church,

attended Catholic schools, and was determined not to do the same for our daughters.

[sundevil2000]

162. I'm sorry he had a bad experience.

Mine was the total opposite.

[ananda]

124. Agree.

The liberal education and the mystical side of life
have been great plusses in my life.

The irrational abusive parts, I just throw by the
wayside.

[truebluegreen]

157. Easier for an adult to do that than for a child. nt

[kwassa]

2. The golden rule comes from religion to start out with ...

and this prison population thing proves precisely nothing. There was a much more interesting piece on religion in prison that was written by a former convict; many in prison turn to obscure or cult religions because those are the ones that reach out to support prisoners when no one else is doing anything for them. They are not prisoners because of religion, they find it in prison.

There are many different types of religious upbringings; this article lumps together all of them, when in fact those upbringings are extremely diverse. A not intelligent approach.

Here is the piece about religion in prison:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/chi-prison-religion-satanists-jehovahs-witness-20150209-story.html#page=1

How fringe religions find followers behind bars

[Kalidurga]

4. Which religion does the golden rule come from?

[hifiguy]

5. The principle exists in virtually every religion.

And it also exists in god-free ethical systems such as Buddhism and Confucianism. People who claim it's "a judeo-xtian thing" are full of shit, to put it bluntly. It's as old as the pyramids, in all likelihood.

[bhikkhu]

22. Which makes it a human universal, which makes it inherent morality without religion

we are born with morality and a sense of right and wrong, as any observant individual who has raised or worked with children should be able to recognize. Religion can steer that one way or another, but it really can't take credit for it.

[hifiguy]

42. It's inherence in humans across the world

Would seem to be strong support for Dawkins' argument that cooperation and reciprocal altruism provided an evolutionary advantage.

[xocet]

93. You may have seen this before, but anyway....

[hifiguy]

96. Those monkeys are clearly a lot more clued in

than working class morans who constantly vote for Repukes.

[ladyVet]

147. This is true.

I love how Christians like to claim their faith is what built human society, as if mankind had not been cooperating since the beginning of the species. All the good and bad of humanity is with us, not put upon us by some made up sky god's rules.

I raised my three boys without religion, other than what they got from their fundie father, and they turned out just fine. The middle one is a disappointment because he took up some of his father's political beliefs, but other than that I can't complain.

And check this out: according to Zuckerman, atheists “were almost absent from our prison population as of the late 1990s,” accounting for less than half of one percent of inmates according to reports by the Federal Bureau of Prisons. “This echoes what the criminology field has documented for more than a century,” he writes, “the unaffiliated and the nonreligious engage in far fewer crimes.”

That's interesting. Maybe being indoctrinated with the belief that whatever "god" you follow is bad for people. Mental abuse, even.

[Art_from_Ark]

43. You can't really say that Buddhism is a god-free ethical system

Buddhism has many deities, including Amitabha Tathagata.

http://www.emuseum.jp/detail/100420/000/000?mode=detail&d_lang=en&s_lang=en&class=3&title=&c_e=&region=&era=&century=&cptype=&owner=&pos=25&num=4

Many Japanese Buddhists often pray to a Buddhist deity to make sure that their ancestors can remain in heaven.

[kwassa]

7. Christianity, and about 20 other faiths.

http://www.teachingvalues.com/goldenrule.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule

[Kalidurga]

8. Do you know what religion the Neanderthals were

Or the people who populated Africa long before they had written communication?

[kwassa]

9. I think they were Scientologists.

Is there a point to your query?

[hifiguy]

10. Neanderthal scientologists.

Now there's a thought that bounces off the brain at an oblique angle.

[kwassa]

20. Some say Scientologists still are Neanderthal.

not that I would ever say anything like that.

[wheniwasincongress]

127. Scientology

is no more silly than, say, Christianity. you can't criticize Scientology if you believe in a god or force out there.

[kwassa]

129. Sure I can. I can criticize whatever I want.

Nyah nyah nyah.

[wheniwasincongress]

134. it's extremely hypocritical

and intellectually dishonest

Have fun

[kwassa]

136. In your opinion. Thank you.

[Kalidurga]

11. Yeah the Golden Rule is innate

Humans would not exist without it.

[kwassa]

13. Religion is innate, too.

not to stir up too much of a hornet's nest here.

[Kalidurga]

17. Spirituality perhaps

but, religion not so much. People tend to stay in the one they were born into. If it were innate as you say it would be universal and there would be very little variation between religions.

[kwassa]

18. People organized in religious communities where they were.

Religion is a group practice of spirituality. Most societies were mono-religious, based on location, though there could certainly be conflict when one religion ran up against another.

The impulse to worship as a group is what I would call innate, not the specific religion.

[F4lconF16]

44. I completely disagree.

The impulse to explain is there. Not to worship. Early religion began as mythology. Mythology is a younger society's method of explaining that which they have no other way to explain.

Worship comes from the idea that there is innate life in everything, which is a reasonable perspective in an early civilization. We idolize and worship those gods out of respect or fear. Religion then grows out of the power structures created by the idea of a god.

The idea that something as complex ideologically as worship simply happens, coming from nowhere, is pretty limited, in my opinion.

[Arugula Latte]

56. The Abrahamic religions seem to have been made up as a means of societal control.

They give power to the few at the expense of the many, especially women.

[kwassa]

65. Joseph Campbell said that the monothesitic religions were the first to see God as ...

a source of justice. Before that the pantheon of gods. were those that arbitrarily interfered in the lives of humans.

[Arugula Latte]

85. Well, at least with the pantheon, you'd have "nice" gods and mean gods.

So if something bad happened, you could blame a bad deity. With monotheism, there's just one Big Kahuna, and he's a sociopath -- oops, I mean, a Loving God, at the same time. And there's really no explanation for his bipolar personality except "it's not ours to question" and "He has a plan" and "He moves in mysterious ways."

I saw the movie "Selma" last night and there was a lot of god thanking and I was thinking: "Really? What kind of a fucked-up god would allow/cause lynchings, slavery, mass discrimination, and the denial of basic human rights and dignity in the first place?" I understand that many people, especially people who have been beaten down, want something to look to to give them hope, but there never seems to be a connect-the-dots moment where people realize that they're thanking a god for whatever crumbs it might throw them and yet never blaming it for any of the bad stuff.

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
~Epicurus

[smirkymonkey]

145. This!

Brilliant.

[bettyellen]

88. that's exactly where they get lost- expecting divine intervention in their personal lives.

Ain't happening people. Cambpell is most interesting when he talks about archetypes and journeys, but I'm pretty sure he was also an anti-Semitic asshole sometimes too.

[bettyellen]

84. nope. 2/3 of local congregations (aka "donor families") never show up, but financially support the

churches because they need to be members when time comes to plan a wedding or baptism.
there used to be a social stigma attached to not attending, and many who did not want to be there were pressured to go. that really relaxed a lot in the 70's and attendance plummeted.

[maggies farm]

69. religion is innate NOT

Spiritual development and quest are perhaps innate, but religion is the after effect of the shaman and the plant. Making religion incredibly diluted and with hubris.

If you want the mystical experience - start with the plant. It will connect you to the universe and your oneness within it.

Regrettably, many cannot separate spirituality and religion.

[PADemD]

35. the Golden Rule is innate

Not to Craig Stephen Hicks.

[Kalidurga]

36. Yes it still is, but wires get crossed in horrible ways sometimes

he might also be a sociopath in that case all bets are off, innate or otherwise.

[deafskeptic]

61. It's not inmate to sociopaths or narcissists either.

Guess that's why such people are so disturbing to the rest of us.

[ReRe]

40. They may have worshipped the SUN.

Or women, because they created life.

[Diclotican]

123. Kalidurga

Kalidurga

Currently we have no idea what the Neanderthals was worshiping - or for that matter what people who populated Africa - or who emigrated out of Africa for 75-80.000 year worshiped - but we do know a few things that they worshiped - more than possible the moon - and some of the stars, as tribes in Africa who have kept most of their traditional culture still worship stars in the heaven - and even have a rich culture around where they originated from - and some tribes even have outright spooky knowledge about some of the stars near the celestial north pool - to a degree that modern scientific knowledge have just now - the last 40 or so odd years been able to catch up with what they already did know - about celestial body's out there...

But we do know - that the Neanderthals was a caring people - who had a strong feeling treating their old, their sick - the ones who was handicapped - or who was not "right" with great dignity - and even gave them of the tribes food, and let them travel with them when they was trekking across Europe after the animals they was killing and eating... So at least - most of what we would point out as rather modern and human - was something even the Neanderthals was known to do - long before any written communication was around...

And by the way - in caves all over Europe - ancient paint-caving have been know to exist - who at least show how expressive the neanderthals was when they was doing their paintings on the walls of caves who was deep underground.. No one really know why they had the habit on doing so - but some suspect it to be part of a deep rooted tradition where they was showing of what they had been hunting down - for some good they worshiped back then...

And we also know - that the neanderthals was of a rather peacefully group of humans - who for the most part just was living in peace and not really waged any wars with others - even if rather tasty when someone come to their territory - we modern humans who arived later was mutch more prune to wiolence of a grand scala than the Neanderthals ever was... But as the story goes - many inter-mingled between the two human spieces - and it is claimed that even today between 2 and 5 percent of our geenes are the same as the neanderthals...

Diclotican

[Kalidurga]

130. Thank you for that.

I get rather perturbed when people talk trash about the Neanderthals. One grave that has been found had things like flowers in it. Which indicates they may have believed in an after life. But, even if it doesn't mean that it certainly shows that they had respect for the dead and that they probably performed some kind of funeral ritual. I do believe they lived by the golden rule and I would not rule out that they had a religion. Cave paintings IMO are the first written form of communication. I am fairly certain that they were preserving information to pass down to the next generation or generations. Things like where the best hunting grounds were, where someone might have died, and perhaps some life stories. I can't prove this having only seen a few dozen paintings I only imagine these are things they would have thought important enough to go deep into a cave to paint. BTW I also have a theory it was probably the women that did this though most think it was the men since they most likely did the hunting, but I digress. I think we could learn a lot from them if we would only listen.

[Diclotican]

132. Kalidurga

Kalidurga

The neanderthals was not that bad, as the rumor should have them to be - in fact if they had been like they originally was belied to be - they would not have survived as long as they did - millenniums in a hard climate where you need to have your wits survive.... Even if they was not building to many great city's like we humans do - they possible at least was able to build houses of tree, who at least gave them a basic shelter from the environment they lived in when needed - but of course it is difficult to know - as they died out more than 30.000 years ago - even if they intermingled with modern humans and had offspring's who survived and who passed on the genes they had together from both the modern humans and the neanderthals...

The indicators from burial rites gives the impression they had some ideas about after life - even though we might not know what it meant - it shows that believe in the after life is not exactly a new though to humans - and I guess when modern humans came to what is known today as Europe - the two spices intermingled - and maybe was sharing common belief, or at least had some of the same ideas about what the after life was all about.... And at least it shown that the neanderthals had some respect for the the ones who was dead - and I doubt we can rule out they had a form of religion - a natural form of religion with deities, like we modern humans had up to rather our own time - and still have in many parts of the world...

Historians, who study this parts of our history, do think the cave paintings was a kind of schooling for the younger generations - as it is shown, both from Europe - and from other places, that children have been given permission to go into this caves - and paint their hands on the walls - for the eternity - today some of this caves, whose still have this painting on the walls - give us the impression that even children had a role in this cave paintings. Maybe to learn the tribes secrets - or to be told the ancient belief, who was being passed down from generation to generation as time was going by - and many of the paintings is even today, impressive paintings of animals - or actions where the tribe in a ritual way was doing things - like hurting (who see to be rather important for them, to show how many animals and people who was able to hunt them down - and specially how they was hunting animals - by sending them over a cliff down to a messy death - specially the great animals - like the mastodon - or other great animals, who was not easy to hunt othervice...

In ancient time - I suspect womans do have a great tradition in painting this pictures - but it is not exactly known if it was exclusively for the women to paint in the caves - when men was out hunting animals - this paintings could also be a joint feature between men and women - at times when it was not easy to get any animals at all... But even then - I guess womans do had a great feature in the old neanderthals world - as it was difficult to let woman just do "womans job" when your whole world and life was in danger - and that they had to work together to make it true hard times - it was not easy to be a Neanderthals - or for that matter a modern human for 50-30.000 years ago - it was often a brutal, hard life and early death by many causes - and for the tribe it was important to take great care for the ones who was hurt and maimed in anyway - as it is shown many times over - the ancient Neanderthals - and early humans did.... I suspect modern humans, when they arrived in what today is Europe - learned a lot how to survive in this rather hard territory - outside of the comfort-zone of Africa....

Diclotican

[erronis]

131. And plenty of non-primates have been shown to have compassion, empathy

I can't really believe that a sentient being (human/primate/vertebrate/living) can think that all sense of do-unto-others-as-you-would-have-them-do-unto-you comes from some formalized crap like "religion".

Let's ask kwassa (name of a pond in the Adirondacks?) if our cries for help and pity as we (all sentient beings) are directed to his/her religion. When does the sentient start to identify with "religion"? What if it is a 3yo homo-sapiens, or a 3yo chimpanzee, or a 3yo orca.

We really need to get off our self-defined and self-build pedestal that places us above other things in this universe. We are no higher and no lower than any other life form. And I'll defer on defining life for now - until someone proves differently I'll work with the assumption that everything is part of life.

[Diclotican]

133. erronis

erronis

I know - many non-primates or non-humanoids have shown and know compassion, empathy and love for others - even outside their own spieces sometimes...

And I suspect everything on this planet - is part of the life we all have to endure when we are on earth - but even then I suspect some spieces of life have a "greater" understanding about what you have to do to others - to be given something back - I suspect most one-celle life - do not posess the idea that if they treat its nearby cell good - the other one celled life wil spare this cells life to be hones - at that level is it more like eating the other guy - before he can eat you... And I suspect even in most mammals - the whole consept of treat others, outside of your flock - your intimitate familiy is something you seldom do - as life is difficult enough as it is... But I do know many mammals do treat others, outside of their flock, your clan so to speak - with tollerance too - so I guess it is somewhat up to the flock how they want to treat strangers....

And I guess it is similar to how we, humans do it too - we can treat others, outside of our own tribe with tolerance and respect - or we can treat the others with all the evilness humans can muster.. Hopefully one day, we wil se every humans as part of the same tribe - the same clan, regardness of how we look on the outside...

Diclotican

[erronis]

141. I believe that this empathy has been shown in very "low" life forms

We're here only because much earlier life forms figured out that they needed to go along in order to get along.

I agree with your points but also feel that most of what we do is almost automatic. I don't go out of my way to make someone else mad at me because that would be detrimental to my existence. It would be classified as psychopathic in some circles. However, if I can find an opportunity to advance my own interests without seeming to harm someone else, I wouldn't be rational.

Not having the texts at hand but would resurrect if it would contribute:

One of the "lowest" (again, I'm using "low" as a cardinal, not an ordinal measure) forms of life has got to be the lowly microbe - a single-celled animalcule (perhaps even more leaning towards what we want to define as a plant vs. an animal).

My understanding is that these very small entities (cells) communicate with one another to help their communities grow, to protect themselves against external threats, and try to help the organism as a whole (multi-celled) survive.

Biofilms are known to repair damage to parts of their "film" (society).

There are millions of examples of symbiotic relationships within your body between some early progenitor animal conglomerations and the stuff they ate. Your mitochondria are probably based on a bit of protoplasm that got ingested by an amoebic-like form. Now you can actually live by generating your own energy.

Of course our gut biome is very much part of the discussion nowadays. And the rest of our body relies on these ancient strangers to make us who we are.

[Diclotican]

144. erronis

erronis

I know - we humans - and most of the other primates, and mammals and whatever creature who live, and have lived on earth the last 4 billion years have their existence thanks to smaller, more primitive life forms, who for some reason desied to get along - by work togheter - it might have happened in a time where earth was a whole different place than it is today - at a time it was not even the atmosfare we have today - what our ancestors would have called home - is something we would have claimed to be poison - and what we call home - is poison for most of the most primitive one celled creatures who lived on earth 3.8 billion years ago....

When life - as we know it - was going from one celled creatures - to more celled creatures - the sum of all the other cells made it more posible for everyone to survive in a often hostile enviroment - we know that today in many of the creatures who live in the sea - where the single cell is small - but when they combine in a organism - where the different parts work togheter wil make everyone survive - and not just that - but prosper and grow.. (Sorry I have some lack of the english langauge - so Im not able to express me the same way I would if I had written in my native language - as I do know a few things about this - but regretable have some lack of english to express it, therefore it posible sounds little primitive the whole thing)

Our own body - are full of this old symbiotic relationshops between some of the oldest, most primitive progenitor creatures who surived in the belly of others - and not just survived but grow in a symbiotic relationship - and I suspect most of our small creatures who live inside ourself today - would have problems survive on the outside - and we would have problems survive withouth this small creatures who for millimeniums - millions of years have ended up in our body - it is at least interesting to read about it all - how we all is a part of the past - if we just look closely about how we ourself works...

Diclotican

[Kablooie]

32. It's a societal rule, not a religious one though religions have adopted it.

It's the basis of a functioning society.
The Japanese are largely non religious yet they live by the golden rule religiously.

[kwassa]

125. The Japanese were Buddhist and Shinto

Both have the Golden Rule.

“The heart of the person before you is a mirror. See there your own form.” Shinto, 500 B.C.

Buddhism;

Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.
—Udanavarga 5:18

[Hosnon]

77. I think it's the other way around.

Religions used our evolved sense of morality, including the Golden Rule, as a starting point.

[cbayer]

99. You are absolutely right about the prison data.

First off, the data is taken from the reports of chaplains and not from the prisoners themselves.

Second, there are clear advantages to being religiously affiliated in prison.

The author has distorted all kinds of data to feed his own agenda. His conclusion is not based on science but on his own beliefs.

[hifiguy]

3. Ladies and gentlemen, Mr Frank Zappa:

Children are naïve -- they trust everyone. School is bad enough, but, if you put a child anywhere in the vicinity of a church, you're asking for trouble. - FZ

My best advice to anyone who wants to raise a happy, mentally healthy child is: Keep him or her as far away from a church as you can. -FZ

[rug]

29. What did Moon and Dweezil think of that?

[Fumesucker]

67. Dweezil seems to have enjoyed having Frank for a father...

Like when Eddie Van Halen came over to personally teach him guitar, and then helped him out at talent night..

[LeftyMom]

6. Kids who don't have their heads stuffed full of bullshit have better bullshit filters?

You don't say?!?!

[truebluegreen]

158. Succinctly put.

[malokvale77]

12. Case in point...

I have a friend currently incarcerated in prison for the fifth time (all alcohol related), who just can't comprehend why GOD won't stop him from acting stupid. He prays and prays, but GOD doesn't listen.

He was raised to believe that his life is in GOD's hands. Everything that has happened in his life is GOD's will.

It hurts my heart because this man is a very kind and generous person who can not accept that his disease is genetic and not a punishment from GOD for some perceived wrong doing.

[LeftyMom]

15. A lot of rehab programs are 12 step or otherwise push god bothering nonsense.

I can understand why, it's cheaper than providing evidence-based care and the results are terrible either way- almost everybody relapses.

So an addict leaning on god and not on himself for getting his shit together probably has a lot of support from authority figures, sadly.

[malokvale77]

21. Correct...

It's the only way the Texas Department of Corrections offers.

[kwassa]

23. It is not about God, it is about a higher power.

"I came to believe that a power greater than myself can restore me to sanity."

What someone chooses to identify as a higher power is up to them. It can be a toaster, as one classic example has it.

The 12 Steps, when properly practiced, is a wonderful outline for a spiritual program.

[Ramses]

27. I will show you the flaw in your logic

What is one decides to make their higher power a bottle of Jack Daniels? How exactly is that higher power going to keep one sober? Unless you have a very strict definition of a "higher power", which make it religion. Religion, spirituality, all the same make believe thinking. One could still believe in Santa Clause, or the Easter Bunny and it would make as much sense

[kwassa]

38. the larger concept behind this is ...

That there is a larger positive power in the universe than ourselves.

Is it definable? Maybe, maybe not. Religions have attempted to, but they are very imperfect models.

It isn't about make-believe.

[F4lconF16]

47. Uhhh an "undefinable larger positive power" than what we know

Sounds pretty spiritual to me. If so, I'mma go with make-believe. Go read their literature--it would be intensely unpleasant to be an atheist in that program.

[Iggo]

153. "...it would be intensely unpleasant ..."

Last edited Sun Feb 15, 2015, 12:54 PM - Edit history (1)

Short answer: It ain't that bad, and that's where the recovery is.

EDIT/ADD: Oops, you said "in that program." And so yeah, you're right. That would be intensely unpleasant because you'd have to tell lies every day, and lying ain't getting better. I've seen the program work for people that can work an honest program, but an atheist cannot work an honest twelve step program. It's god-based, no matter how many protestations to the contrary form the "spiritual not religious" people. That "higher power can be anything you want" speech is utter bullshit. I forget the exact wording, but it goes something like this: "For our purposes, there is one authority, a loving god as he may express himself in the group conscience." God is in everything they do, no matter how hard they back-pedal. They're trying to be inclusive, and that's really really nice, but it's like going to church. They're eventually going to tell you you can't do it without "the god of your understanding." So yeah, the program is not for atheists, but the meetings are for everybody.

[F4lconF16]

155. Actually, it is that bad.

I would be very uncomfortable in that setting. I would not be able to pretend to accept a power higher than myself, and in that community you will be ostracized for it. But thanks for at least trying to empathize instead of just telling us to suck it up

Also, that method is not where the recovery lies, and to non-theists, can actually be harmful.
http://m.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/03/the-surprising-failures-of-12-steps/284616/

More links if you want, just google it.

[Iggo]

156. See my edit/add.

[F4lconF16]

160. Awesome, thanks.

I agree with all of that.

[LeftyMom]

46. 12 step programs aren't "spiritual," they're religious.

I know, some asshole will say you can call the group or a doorknob the god of your understanding, but the use of a specific protestant prayer in every meeting shows that that's nonsense.

[kwassa]

62. No, the 12 steps are an excellent model of an individual spiritual path.

With all due respect, I really don't think you understand the 12 step program. Properly practiced, it is precisely a spiritual program, and in no way an organized religious group. There is no system of religious dogma in the 12 steps. It is about the process, not about the belief.

[maggies farm]

74. LSD could help alcoholics stop drinking, AA founder believed

You are better off with LSD or other entheogens

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/aug/23/lsd-help-alcoholics-theory


The co-founder of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) believed LSD could be used to cure alcoholics and credited the drug with helping his own recovery from often debilitating depression, according to new research.

About 20 years after setting up the Ohio-based sobriety movement in 1935, Bill Wilson came to believe that LSD could help "cynical alcoholics" achieve a "spiritual awakening" and start on the path to recovery.

..."But after his first acid trip, at the Veterans Administration (VA) hospital in Los Angeles on 29 August 1956, Wilson began to believe it was insight, not terror, that could help alcoholics recover."

[Ramses]

26. yea, it is genetic

and this is why AA is dangerous in my opinion. Giving people a false sense of hope by having them believe in fairy tales is emotionally abusive and damaging to critical thinking and science

Religion unfortunately, is a tool used to keep populations in line, and promote unthinking behavior.

[malokvale77]

37. Yes Ramses...

and until my friend understands this he will be at the mercy of our (not much) justice system.

The strange thing is, this guy thinks I am the most awesome person on the planet (he only knows hundreds of people), but can't understand how I could be, without GOD in my life.

Unlike the poster above, I don't buy into the 'higher power' shit. The only power we have comes from within ourselves.

Peace to you.

[ReRe]

45. That's my religion too ;-) n/t

[malokvale77]

49. The power of one...

Within ourselves, is also the only place we will ever find peace.

[ReRe]

51. "The power of one"...

... can't believe you said that. I say that all the time.

[malokvale77]

54. Like minds and all. (nt)

[Populist_Prole]

75. Ha ha. Good point. I'll never forget a relative of mine

She was always kind of nutty neo-evangelist who began to read into everything as a relious interpretation. Began sending money to televangelists, and trying to talk anybody and everybody into attending AA meetings.

She also had a habit of making long visits without enough money to pay her way. Once she needed a ride to the airport to go home and nobody was available and couldn't afford a livery car and began to tremble with worry. We all ( brothers/sisters/mother/step-father/uncle/aunt ) frantically scraped from our own pockets, sugar bowl emergency cash etc and hired a livery car for her. You know what she said? "Oh, you see now how god takes care of me?". I thought my step-father was going to throttle her right then and there.

[kristopher]

81. There is a strong social element to addiction

[drray23]

14. many of us already figured that out. nt.

[cherokeeprogressive]

16. It may.

[SunSeeker]

19. I teach my kid that the Golden Rule is the key to our survival.

It directs us to work together and develop solutions to our problems that will help the most people.

Sadly, even though all religions claim to adopt this rule, most religions immediately subvert it by teaching that anyone not of their religion is going to hell, not equal or not fully human.

[NoMoreRepugs]

34. He who has the Gold rules??

I know its a poor attempt at humor...

[SunSeeker]

41. That's the Koch Rule. nt

[Skittles]

59. no one needs religion to treat each other fairly

[SunSeeker]

60. That's for sure.

If anything, religion gets in the way of treating others fairly...especially if they don't happen to believe the same religion.

[Ramses]

25. REC

[AngryDem001]

28. Water is wet.

[Augustus]

30. Replace "religion" with "child abuse"

And you don't even really need a study to know this is true.

[el_bryanto]

111. To be clear you feel that parents who take their children to sunday school

are guilty of child abuse?

Bryant

[mackerel]

31. "Raising children without religion may be a better alternative."

Great, one more thing my kids get to use against me. LOL

[valerief]

33. If you can believe in a magic man in the sky, you can believe any horseshit. And that's

how Republicans get votes.

[cherokeeprogressive]

58. Would you say ALL life on Earth is nothing more than a cosmic anomaly? A coincidence?

All life. On Earth.

If your answer is yes... then you'd also have to make the claim that all philosophy, and all philosophers had shit for brains for wondering "why am I here?"... right? Because any THINKING being would KNOW the answer, and that the answer is THERE IS NO ANSWER. Burn their books... for THEY might be the reason for the non-stop turmoil on this soon to be consumed by external forces rock we live on.

They'd HAVE to have shit for brains for even wondering. IF all life was a cosmic anomaly, THERE IS NO REASON... NO RHYME... NO PURPOSE.

There is no commonality, therefore no community. No reason... no reason AT ALL... to consider whether your actions have a positive or a negative effect upon those around you... or those who come after you. Why would there be? Nothing brought us here... therefore nothing will take us away. THEREFORE, fuck everything but ME.

Actually, I kind of like that.

[1monster]

68. I have a different take on life... More and more, I believe Everything is sentient...

That the whole universe is one ginormous connection of sentient entities.

We've seen videos of turtles showing empathy (and the Golden Rule perpaps), in helping another turtle get back on its feet when it flipped on its back.

Scientists have discovered that crops and other plants send out super sonic screams for help during droughts. The ants that invade the classrooms when the rains come show self-awareness and knowledge that each individual is in danger when a finger comes at it as it tries to hide under a book or paper on a desk.

I am sometimes haunted by the memory of a young live oak tree that grew very swiftly in our back yard. Our drain field was no longer working and we had to have a new one built. The health department, which issued the permit for the new drain field, said the live oak had to go.

As the tree surgeons began to first trim off the large branches, the tree began to tremble and shake. Even when the saws were silent and the men stepped away from it to adjust the ladders and other eqipment, the tree did not stop shaking until it was down.

I believe that the whole of everything is on a constant cycle of life, chage, death, renewal and rebirth. "Therefore," as John Donne once wrote, "never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for there."

[KittyWampus]

97. we are close in our world view. And whenever I take quizzes it labels me pantheist but

but splitting philosophical hairs, I can also be labeled an atheist.

I do not think sentience or consciousness is primarily or even necessarily localized.

[valerief]

161. How would I know? Only a fool answers unanswerable questions. But I do think

the Why Am I Here? question is meaningless. How Do Things Work is the correct question.

[flvegan]

39. Empathy isn't religious.

It *can* be, to the weak-minded.

[el_bryanto]

112. To clarify; who are you calling weak-minded? nt

[flvegan]

146. That's a funny response!

[el_bryanto]

159. You didn't answer the question though. I don't want to make any assumptions. nt

[hughee99]

48. On thing about the statistics I found interesting. While it says that atheists are

a very small percentage of the prison population, the stats I googled (and I'm not sure they're correct, but for the sake of argument, I'm assuming they are somewhat accurate) show that atheists were more likely to be white and college educated. Aren't these the same demographics that tend to be less likely to be convicted or serve jail time when arrested?

http://www.pewforum.org/2012/10/09/nones-on-the-rise-demographics/

[cbayer]

101. This is true and another reason why the prison statistics are worthless.

[frazzled]

50. The North Carolina killer was a committed, vocal atheist.

Just so everybody doesn't get all up in their atheists can do no wrong complacency. There are good and bad people of all persuasions in the real world, where "studies"don't mean jack.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

53. Not all Right Wingers are Jesus Freaks....

Some worship WWF or NASCAR.

[frazzled]

66. He wasn't a right-winger either.

He was a gun-totin' atheist liberal Democrat, at least according to the NYT article read the other day.

Personally, I find gun-totin' and liberal to be a total oxymoron.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

76. He wasn't an atheist....

He was an extremist.

A middle aged balding white guy with an arsenal who hates Muslims is the product of the media. He is now the darling of the Right Wing media in particular as they want to play the victims of "the librul media". They are pounding out story after story of how THEY are the victims because the rest of the media isn't trumpeting news of this asshole from the highest tower.

[LittleBlue]

80. He is a progressive atheist

Verifiably so. His Facebook likes were all consistent with progressive ideologies.

He's about as left as it gets on the American political spectrum.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

86. Wrong. I'm further.

[frazzled]

120. He was an extremist atheist

A prosyletizer of atheism. As bad as prosyletizers of religion:

Mr. Hicks appeared to have a deep dislike of all religion. On his Facebook page, nearly all of his posts expressed support for atheism, criticism of Christian conservatives or both.

Last month, he posted a photograph that said, “Praying is pointless, useless, narcissistic, arrogant, and lazy; just like the imaginary god you pray to.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/12/us/muslim-student-shootings-north-carolina.html?_r=0

Did he kill those students over their religious beliefs or over the parking spots? Who cares: the point here is that people can be good or bad, regardless of religion or no religion. Guns are bad. Baddy bad bad.

Disclosure: I am a semi-agnostic, with no formal religious affiliation at this time. However, I was brought up in a progressive religious environment (involved in the civil rights movement and anti-Vietnam war movement), and I still participate in some of the cultural aspects of my religious background. (e.g., I hold a Passover seder to consider issues of freedom; and I observe the high holidays in order to reflect on my actions and behavior of the year; I eat the foods of my people on these occasions, to celebrate my cultural heritage.).

[cbayer]

126. Your background sounds so much like my own.

Raised in a church that focused on social justice, economic equality, peace, civil rights. My father was/is a minister and I didn't even know that there was any other kind of religion for a long time. In the 60's, my parents took me on a road trip to the south so we could see what was going on. This was my first exposure to religiously based bigotry.

I also describe myself as agnostic, as well as apatheist. I don't know if there is a god or not but I value the good in religion and promote it when I see the good.

Bad is bad, as you say. Religious or not, it makes no difference. Proselytizing is proselytizing. Anyone who things they have found the "one way" and wants to convert you, whether it is to a religious belief or to atheism, is not ok in my book.

It's all about actions.

Glad to make your acquaintance.

[frazzled]

148. Yes, we are very much in sync

I think people's views on religion may have a lot to do with the religion to which they were exposed when they were younger. It may have been a good experience or bad--or mixed. So even if we move beyond the belief system itself, we see its value if our experience was positive (and revile it if it was negative).

In the end, I get why religions are useful to people. Especially as I age. A close friend of ours became tragically ill last year and was unconscious in the ICU. When it became apparent the end was upon us, I turned to his wife and asked: would X want to have Last Rites? (He was a great intellectual and artist, but I knew he had been brought up Catholic and, like all lapsed Catholics, was still fascinated with its beauty and spiritual legacy). It had occurred to no one else in the room. "Yes!" she replied, and I went to get help in finding a priest. This last gesture seemed somehow meaningful ... in some odd way. It put a lid on it all.

[cbayer]

149. I think you are absolutely right about

how one's early experiences with religion can color their views as adults. Mine was very positive, and although I am not religious now, I see the value. Clearly there are many who have had much different experiences.

The story about your friend is heartbreaking. It is often the rituals associated with religion that make passages easier or more meaningful. My son was married in a catholic church last year. Although much of it was foreign to me, I really enjoyed the whole ritual.

[Logical]

64. Ahhh, someone does not like this post. nt

[kristopher]

82. You might want to brush up on..

..the difference between statistical data and anecdotal data. If anything, it is the anecdotal data that "doesn't mean jack" in the "real world".

[frazzled]

119. You might want to post this in response to all the anectodal posts

in this thread. It seems you are selective in your application of "anecdotal."

[Spitfire of ATJ]

52. Not surprised to hear religious types have a hard time with reality....

I've met some that are out and out delusional. They'll hear things and see things that aren't there.

[cbayer]

103. Yep, that's right. Only religious people become psychotic.

Or maybe this really flawed conclusion is just a consequence of your own bias?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

108. People can be delusional and not psychotic you know.

[cbayer]

110. You are talking about people that see and hear things that aren't there.

That's psychosis and actually hallucinations, not delusions.

I tire of people tagging religious believers with psychiatric diagnoses that they clearly don't even understand.

Your post appears to be nothing more than a cheap shot at religious people.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

113. "Your post appears to be nothing more than a cheap shot at religious people."

Would you prefer a more expensive one?

[cbayer]

114. No, but I would love one based on facts and not on some false beliefs

that are maintained despite clear evidence to the contrary.

BTW, that is what a delusion is.

How about some of the rational thought and reason?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

117. How is my observation a "false belief"?

[cbayer]

118. "Not surprised to hear religious types have a hard time with reality"

You present that as a fact, when it's not even supported by the article.

You then go on to say that you have observed religious people to be hallucinating and delusional, even though you are misusing the term delusional.

Maybe it's not a belief, just biased snark. I'm going to vote for the second option at this point.

[bobGandolf]

55. You deserve a heart for posting....

this very interesting study. Have no idea why I have not heard a peep about this from the MSM.

[Arugula Latte]

57. We've raised our kids in a god-free home and so far they haven't committed any murders

that we know of.

[99Forever]

63. Raising children not to believe in...

... magic and old myths seems like a no-brainer to any thinking, reasoning person. That it isn't, really betrays just how much power the control freaks hold.

[HappyMe]

72. People should raise their kids

how they see fit.

[Vattel]

78. I am an atheist, but I don't think that the golden rule is the single basic moral principle.

“For secular people, morality is predicated on one simple principle: empathetic reciprocity, widely known as the Golden Rule. Treating other people as you would like to be treated. It is an ancient, universal ethical imperative. And it requires no supernatural beliefs.”

The well-being of those who cannot "reciprocate" also matters. And morality is not all about well-being. And n ot everyone likes the same kind of treatment. So sometimes you should treat others differently than you would want them to treat you.

[bettyellen]

87. the golden rule does not require reciprocity, nor would anyone "want" their needs ignored in

favor of someone else's wishes. It's really not all that hard.

[Vattel]

89. I guess I misinterpreted what "empathetic reciprocity" means.

Still, the golden rule is kind of dumb, if interpreted literally, because not everyone wants the same sort of treatment. Morality is complex. Trying to reduce it to the golden rule is quixotic.

[bettyellen]

91. the empathetic part is about others wishes, so it recognizes that not everyone wants the same things

not sure why it is so complicated. it's a pretty good rule of thumb- not to treat others in ways that would bother you.
takes it a bit further than "do no harm" but in a good way.

[Vattel]

128. Yeah, I get the general idea. But it doesn't provide much guidance

when there is a conflict of interests.

[bettyellen]

135. LOL, I think it does. It encourages empathy and fairness. So when there is a conflict of interests

you negotiate equitably to resolve- same as most of us hope others would do.

[Vattel]

138. LOL, it encourages acting morally and so the circle is complete.

[bettyellen]

139. I do think encouraging empathy is a good basic guideline.

As far as things like that go.

[Vattel]

143. I agree. The golden rule is useful as a rule of thumb.

My only point is that morality cannot be reduced to it.

[salib]

100. Thank you for saying this

Sometimes it seems that the universalist/golden rule crowd is the only voice out there.

The golden rule is fine as a basis of some dorms of morality and can be a foundation of some subset of ethics, but is not the only thing out there. It is also fairly simplistic, at least when one looks at the moral discussions of most people using it as as basis. One could likely argue that it is very narrow to claim that it is the only, or even primary, basis for morality. Rather narrow-minded actually.

[Fred Friendlier]

79. This just proves that atheists don't understand statistics

Some atheists have a better more grounding than some religious folks? That is as surprising as the finding that the strongest scots are stronger than the weakest irish. Who would be dumb enough to expect otherwise.

And knowing that atheists are whiter and more affluent than the general population, and clocking in at about one half to one percent of that population, is it any surprise that they make up a half a percent of the prison population?

This article is the atheist equivalent of seeing the face of Jeebus in a piece of toast, and some people are acting as silly as the Christers in response.

[kristopher]

83. Most recent polling: Atheists = 13% of US population. nt

[cbayer]

106. Where in the did you get that piece of data?

[cbayer]

104. +1

[DesertDiamond]

90. Every Nichiren Buddhist I know strives to show the benefit of Buddhist practice - the child chooses

to practice or not to practice. My mother, a Catholic, was wonderful that way too - she made me go to mass every Sunday but let me explore other things, and when I became Buddhist she supported my choice.

[FiveGoodMen]

92. Don't be ridiculous

Telling children that they deserve to burn forever but saying the magic words ("I believe...&quot will get them out of it -- although they still deserve it...

There can't be a better approach to child-raising that that!

Seriously, that sort of abuse should lead to loss of custody.

[KittyWampus]

94. this is so stupid I can't even believe it. Children SHOULD be able to use their imaginations

and create realities.

I couldn't think of anything that would foster authoritarianism more than wanting kids to be "realistic".

FURTHERMORE, absence of religion doesn't mean absence of a world view.

[Fumesucker]

98. Religion isn't presented as an exercise in imagination, it's presented as a fact in Sunday School

Jesus loves me this I know
For the Bible tells me so


Plenty of people who love Jesus hate Harry Potter because it's imaginative.

[KittyWampus]

102. Not in my Sunday School classes back when I taught. And the article makes it clear

that thinking Harry Potter or any fantasy world is real equals bad.

I have noticed you have a cartoon version of what religion is and what "religious" people are like.

You paint with an extremely broad brush. Not very liberal or very realistic.

[Fumesucker]

115. I talk about religion quite a bit with people I know

I can give an epic Bible reading, I was the "official" Bible reader in Sunday School for many years because I was the only child that didn't stumble over the archaic KJ phraseology. It opens a lot of doors to me to discuss religion with people and I do it quite bit, almost never revealing my own actual feelings.

What I present is the way they explain their thinking to me, I run into far more Biblical literalists or semi-literalists than otherwise. Just this morning at the flea market I go to with a couple of friends most Saturdays I was accosted by preacher asking me if I "know the Lord", we had a little discussion and it was clear he was a literalist.

So you presented God as "just a myth" as a Sunday School teacher?

[cbayer]

107. Agree. The study itself in no way stated that being less imaginative

was a good thing. They in no way endorsed children being raised without religion. This is only the author's belief and not based in fact.

[cbayer]

95. Except the studies don't conclude that and the author is bending the truth.

The studies show that being raised with god or without god are pretty much equivalent.

The prison data is highly questionable and has been repeatedly disputed.

But let's never miss an opportunity to do some religion bashing!

[KittyWampus]

105. this thread belongs in the religion forum where atheist/theist DU'ers can continue their squabbling

I've so little patience for this topic on DU.

Almost never an intelligent conversation.

[cbayer]

109. This study was already discussed in religion back when it was first released.

It also made at least one previous appearance in GD, possibly more.

I agree that it should be in religion.

[1monster]

122. Feel free to move it over there if you wish. I found an interesting article and passed it on

Last edited Sun Feb 15, 2015, 12:31 PM - Edit history (1)

here in General Discussion where, I don't believe it is out of place.

It was never my intention to ruffle anyone's feelings. I think perhaps some people are a little to entrenched in their own perspective to discuss any topic without emotions interferring.

[blkmusclmachine]

116. Good.

[Gman]

137. Sure appears like a "study" with a predetermined

finding and set about to try to substantiate based on some false premises. For one thing, do you know any Black atheists? Does anybody? I sure don't. And I don't know any atheist Hispanics. Both are groups that are very heavily religious. Of course they're not going to find any atheists from the two predominate groups in prison. The "study's" assertion is ridiculous.

[Android3.14]

140. We raised ours secular

I've never run across religious young men so determined to be ethical as my own sons.

[tblue37]

142. K&R. nt

[fadedrose]

150. So far, have read only the OP title

but am so pleased by it. Sometimes I feel guilty for not bringing religion to my kids, but would feel more guilty passing on what I learned when I know it is not true.

Thanks....

[Faux pas]

151. Thank you for posting this

Imonster!

[Trillo]

152. Or not raising children at all.

It is one method of protecting your children from religions and authoritarians who lie cheat and steal. Yes, don't have them. The religious can't abuse what doesn't exist.

[Trillo]

154. So why are religious schools allowed for the compulsory requirement?

Somebody had to ask.

I went to religious schools for a few years, and I found they were run by liars cheats and thieves. It was a very good way to turn me off Christianity for the rest of my life.