Half Of Brits Say Religion Does More Harm Than Good, And Atheists Can Be Just As Moral

[cbayer]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/11/03/religion-beyond-belief_n_6094442.html

Jessica Elgot Become a fan

Posted: 04/11/2014 13:01 GMT Updated: 58 minutes ago

Britain is changing, becoming more multicultural and secular. Is religion changing too? Throughout November, The Huffington Post UK is running its Beyond Belief series, profiling remarkable Britons who've taken on their faith to create a force for change.

More than half of Britons believe that religion does more harm than good, with less than a quarter believing faith is a force for good, the Huffington Post UK can reveal today.

Even 20% of British people who described themselves as being 'very religious' said religion was harmful to society, and a quarter of said atheists were more likely to be moral individuals than religious people.

The exclusive poll for the HuffPost UK reveals that just 8% of Britons describe themselves as very religious, with more than 60% saying they were not religious at all.

The eye-opening survey, that will reopen debate over the role and worth of religion to British society, found of the 'non-religious' people polled, more than 60% said they thought religion caused more problems than it solved.

more at link

[Jim__]

1. I'd like to see a breakdown of religion by age.

Of the 2,004 people surveyed in the HuffPost/Survation poll, 56% described themselves as Christian, 2.5% were Muslim, 1% were Jewish and the remainder were of another faith or none

...

Older people also dismissed the idea that atheists are less moral people, just 3% of over 65s believe that to be true. It is young people with a more negative view of atheism, with 12% of 18-24-year-olds believing that atheists are less moral people.

Based on the breakdown of the 2011 census, it looks like Muslims would be more heavily represented among the young than the old and I'm wondering if that accounts for the disparity of opinion between the age groups.

[cbayer]

4. It would be very interesting to see more demographic breakdown.

I have looked for but not found more data from this poll.

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. Muslims are more common among the young, but not enough to account for that difference alone

The England and Wales 2011 census figures for religion by age: https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/census/2011/DC2107EW/view/2092957703?rows=c_age&cols=c_relpuk11

Muslims are 6.2% of the 18-24 age group, compared with 1.2% of the over-65s, so that's not enough to account for a 9% increase.

[LeftishBrit]

7. Although Muslims are more represented among the young than the old, overall, older people are more

likely to be religious than younger people.

The proportions of people in any age group who think that atheists are less moral is very small in the UK. Older people may be just a bit less likely than younger ones to express a strong view on the matter.

[Cartoonist]

2. I don't like the numbers

Of course, I agree with the winning sentiment, but this is contrary to past surveys. I believe the numbers can shift over time, but this is a monumental shift from what I've previously seen.

Maybe I just haven't been paying attention to the UK. If I saw these numbers in the USA, I would think they only polled members of the A&A group.

[cbayer]

3. I don't think it's a monumental shift in the UK.

As the article states, the percentage of people identifying as christian went from 72% to 59% from 2001 to 2011, and those identifying as having no religion increased from 6.5 million to 14.1 million from 2011 until the present.

The UK is much less religious than the US, and I agree that you would not see these numbers in the US.

[LeftishBrit]

6. The UK isn't a terribly religious country on the whole

One survey indicated that less than 10 per cent of Brits had attended a place of worship in the previous week and less than 40 per cent in the last year.

Not all non-religious people are explicitly atheist; many are just totally indifferent to religion.

[cbayer]

8. And I think it's that indifference which is reflected in this poll to a large extent.

[Liberal Lolita]

9. 6 Ways Religion Does More Bad Than Good

Interesting article:
http://www.alternet.org/belief/6-ways-religion-does-more-bad-good
snip

In 2010, sociologist Phil Zuckerman published Society Without God: What the Least Religious Nations Can Tell Us About Contentment. Zuckerman lined up evidence that the least religious societies also tend to be the most peaceful, prosperous and equitable, with public policies that help people to flourish while decreasing both desperation and economic gluttony.

As science eats away at territory once held by religion, traditional religious beliefs require greater and greater mental defenses against threatening information. To stay strong, religion trains believers to practice self-deception, shut out contradictory evidence, and trust authorities rather than their own capacity to think.

One of the things that it discusses is how religions use peoples generosity to build the religion over helping the disadvantaged. This is one of the problems I have had with "faith based initiatives" that the Republicans push as an alternative to a social safety net. Sure the church will give you a basket of food, if you sit through a sermon. Thanks, but no thanks.

[cbayer]

10. I think it pretty much evens out over the long run.

For every 6 things the one can find bad, it's pretty easy to find 6 things that are good.

While I also have problem with faith-based and government funded initiatives, until the government and secular groups step up to the plate to take care of the neediest and most marginalized, there is a need for them.

While there are some churches that appear to be profit making enterprises, most are not. Most do actually give what they collect to the poor either directly or through services. I've worked in many a soup kitchen and food bank and I have never, ever seen a requirement that someone must sit through a sermon. Never. That doesn't mean that it never occurs, but I want to make the point that it certainly does not always occur.

The author is an evangelical turned atheist. She is entitled to her POV and I am sure there are good reasons for her negativity, if not downright hostility.

But her POV is just that and based on her own experiences. She does not draw on any kind of data or science or reason or fact based rationality to make her points.

For a different perspective on what religion does right, I recommend you view "Half the Sky". It is about the most heinous things being done to women and girls. Many of the groups or agencies trying to protect them are religiously based.

[trotsky]

11. "Half the Sky"

Many of the groups or agencies trying to protect them are religiously based.

As are many of the groups oppressing them. But you won't allow people to discuss that.

[Liberal Lolita]

13. I saw no hosility in the article

What I read was a reasoned thought out explanation of things I have seen for myself.
I agree that religion does some good. It's a nice community that brings people together.
As for making the needy sit through a sermon to get help, some do, some don't. Often it isn't a matter of sitting in a church with the preacher, it is a matter of the helpers who feel the need to "spread the word". While you may not see that as preaching, I do.
Oftentimes ministers are less pushy than parishioners, because they are trained on how to approach people in a conciliatory manner. Church members can say things that turn off the very people they are trying to recruit, though they often don't realize it. They think they are being friendly. As an example, telling someone how they should live their life, is implying they are living it wrong. Most people consider that overstepping, possibly even unfriendly.
If those who are the problem could learn to accept that the non-religious are equal to them, often just as moral, and learn to treat people accordingly, they would get a lot further. In addition we would be much better off as a society.

[cbayer]

14. I think you might see the hostility if you didn't fully agree with her

or you were a believer of some sort.

That's pretty much how these things go.

Again, my experience with food banks and soup kitchens and medical outreach and scores of other organizations have been relatively free of proselytizing. I am sure that has to do with the places I have chosen to work with.

I do agree that proselytizing can turn people off in a big way, whether it is about religious beliefs or lack of beliefs.

I would love to see all people treat each other as equals, whether they have beliefs or not.

[Liberal Lolita]

15. You may be right

The article seemed reasonable from my world view. Just as in my example of preaching to the needy, pointing out the pitfalls of religion, to believers, probably seems hostile.
I am happy to hear that you don't see the preaching in the groups you choose to work with. Though I would like to point out that, what may seem perfectly ordinary, to you, others may find offensive.

[cbayer]

16. I think it's the overall negativity.

I couldn't find much of anything positive at all. Like proselytizing to nonbelievers, that kind of approach can be a real turn off to those who have a positive or more balanced view of religion.

I'm not a believer but I am a supporter of believers and nonbelievers and those in between.

But I don't identify as an atheists and you might be very right that I miss things that are offensive to others.

I think we all do from time to time.

Very nice talking to you.

[Liberal Lolita]

17. Nice talking to you too

"I'm not a believer but I am a supporter of believers and nonbelievers and those in between.

But I don't identify as an atheists and you might be very right that I miss things that are offensive to others."

You and I have this in common. I know a few religions I do not identify with, but I don't consider myself and atheist either. I just haven't found a religion that fully aligns with my beliefs. One thing that can best sum up my belief is: Do on to others, as you would have them do on to you.

[cbayer]

18. I think more people are like us than are different.

While some have taken a very definitive stance in terms of what they believe or don't, I think most of us are pretty squishy.

The rising number of "nones" I think is very indicative of what you describe - people that don't necessarily reject religion or spirituality, but don't feel connected to anything in particular.

The Golden Rule is just about the best guide there is, I agree.

[pinto]

12. This is a key point from the piece, imo -

"public policies that help people to flourish while decreasing both desperation and economic gluttony"

Governments that institute and maintain supportive public policies are essential to the greater good of all. I don't see it as a competition between the secular and faith based efforts to get to the same goals.

Zuckerman's broad brush assessment of religion that he tags on to the issue is BS. Yeah, religion is confining, detrimental and harmful in many aspects. As are many governments. Or secular social movements.

He overlooks those faith based groups that have supported, contributed, stepped up and continue to do so for the greater good of all.

Some balance is sorely needed in this public discourse.