In Case You Thought Religion Makes Society Less Violent

[stromboli]

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-1101-zuckerman-violence-secularism-20151101-story.html

Whenever tragedy strikes in America, some conservative politician or pundit will inevitably blame it on secularism. In the aftermath of the shooting at Umpqua Community College, for example, Fox host Bill O'Reilly cited weakening religion as the culprit. "As the world becomes more secular," he declared, "civilized restraints to bad behavior drop." Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee offered similar sentiments after the 2012 school shooting in Newtown, Conn., blaming such wanton violence on the fact that "we have systematically removed God from our schools."

The theory is simple: If people become less religious, then society will decay. Crime will skyrocket, violence will rise, and once-civilized life will degenerate into immorality and depravity. It's an old, widespread notion. And it's demonstrably false.

If it were true that when belief in God weakens, societal well-being diminishes, then we should see abundant evidence for this. But we don't. In fact, we find just the opposite: Those societies today that are the most religious â€" where faith in God is strong and religious participation is high â€" tend to have the highest violent crime rates, while those societies in which faith and church attendance are the weakest â€" the most secular societies â€" tend to have the lowest.

We can start at the international level. The most secular societies today include Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Czech Republic, Estonia, Japan, Britain, France, the Netherlands, Germany, South Korea, New Zealand, Australia, Vietnam, Hungary, China and Belgium. The most religious societies include Nigeria, Uganda, the Philippines, Pakistan, Morocco, Egypt, Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, El Salvador, Colombia, Senegal, Malawi, Indonesia, Brazil, Peru, Jordan, Algeria, Ghana, Venezuela, Mexico and Sierra Leone.

It is the highly secularized countries that tend to fare the best in terms of crime rates, prosperity, equality, freedom, democracy, women's rights, human rights, educational attainment and life expectancy. (Although there are exceptions, such as Vietnam and China, which have famously poor human rights records.) And those nations with the highest rates of religiosity tend to be the most problem-ridden in terms of high violent crime rates, high infant mortality rates, high poverty rates and high rates of corruption.

Take homicide. According to the United Nations' 2011 Global Study on Homicide, of the 10 nations with the highest homicide rates, all are very religious, and many â€" such as Colombia, Mexico, El Salvador and Brazil â€" are among the most theistic nations in the world. Of the nations with the lowest homicide rates, nearly all are very secular, with seven ranking among the least theistic nations, such as Sweden, Japan, Norway and the Netherlands.

Now consider the flip side: peacefulness. According to the nonprofit organization Vision of Humanity, which publishes an annual Global Peace Index, each of the 10 safest and most peaceful nations in the world is also among the most secular, least God-believing in the world. Most of the least safe and peaceful nations, conversely, are extremely religious.

As professor Stephen Law of the University of London observed: "If a decline in religiosity were the primary cause [of social ills], then we would expect those countries that have seen the greatest decline to have the most serious problems. But that is not the case."

What about within the United States? According to the latest study from the Pew Research Center, the 10 states that report the highest levels of belief in God are Louisiana, Arkansas, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee and Oklahoma (tied with Utah). The 10 states with the lowest levels of belief in God are Maine, Vermont, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New York, Alaska, Oregon and California. And as is the case in the rest of the world, when it comes to nearly all standard measures of societal health, including homicide rates, the least theistic states generally fare much better than the most theistic. Consider child-abuse fatality rates: Highly religious Mississippi's is twice that of highly secular New Hampshire's, and highly religious Kentucky's is four times higher than highly secular Oregon's.

It is, of course, impossible to conclude from any of this data that secularism, in and of itself, causes societal well-being, or that religiosity causes social ills. Peacefulness, prosperity and overall societal goodness are undoubtedly caused by multiple, complex factors â€" economic, geographic, cultural, political, historical and so forth. That said, it is clear that a strong or increased presence of secularism isn't the damaging threat to society so many continually claim it to be. If only the likes of O'Reilly and Huckabee would take heed.

Basically this just rubber stamps what we already knew, but its a good article.

[Baruch]

Chicken vs egg.  Does poverty drive people into religion, or does religion drive people into poverty?  I don't think violence directly correlates ... Americans for instance are just violent people.

[Blackleaf]

My thoughts were pretty much in line with Baruch's. Does religion cause people to be more violent, or do violent people have a greater preference for religion?

I'm not convinced that religion causes people to be violent. I think it's likely that violent people use religion as an excuse for their behavior. In a theoretical world without religion, I think those violent people would just find something else to justify their behavior, such as race, politics, nationality, economic status, etc.

If you look at religion strictly by what it teaches, almost all of them advocate peace and charity. Based on what I've read in the Protestant New Testament, if you claim to be a Christian, but you don't feed the hungry, aid the widows, or visit those in prison, and just live a self-centered life, you'll go to Hell just like any nonbeliever. Basically, God does not give free tickets to Heaven to whoever joins his son's fan club; you have to prove your faith by being the most decent human being possible.

[josephpalazzo]

It's almost impossible to correlate violence and religion. In the article, what is compared is highly secularized societies with others. What needs to be taken into consideration is that secularized societies are more often democracies with the rule of law well instituted and constitutional rights for minorities, including religious freedoms for all. This in turn will foster such attitudes yielding a lesser crime rate than in those societies where these rights are not guaranteed.

[peacewithoutgod]

Chicken vs egg.  Does poverty drive people into religion, or does religion drive people into poverty?  I don't think violence directly correlates ... Americans for instance are just violent people.

Is that a serious question? Yes, religion drives poverty! It's undeniable, as plain to see and smell as dogshit on the sidewalk! It encourages poverty by appealing, above all, to the poor. Blessed are the poor in spirit, for they shall inherit the kingdom. You don't want to be the rich man, for then obtaining your heavenly inheritance will become tough as getting a camel through the eye of a needle. Do not worry where shall you sleep, what shall you wear, how shall you eat, for your god will take care of you as surely as he clothes and feeds the birds! Such nonsensical attitudes make those who soak them up more docile, less competitive, more trusting, and therefore easier prey. People expect they will be guided and taken care of, their ambition goes slack, and they become generally less thoughtful regarding any matters of truth or social justice, and this makes the mistreatment of others easier for them to justify. The latter happens because when a Christian with avarice and ambition sees a way that he can take advantage of a situation, he can presume that it was presented by his god, who wants him to prosper, and he may even justify his enrichment at another's expense is justified because he's the faithful one! Thereby predatory Christians feed more easily on other people, while those who are sensitized to soft-pedaled Christianity can become anybody's easy victim. There's nothing there to motivate win-win solutions between anybody. Therefore, poverty does follow religiosity, and that violence follows poverty is an established fact.

[Baruch]

Peacewithoutgod ... really?  All atheists are millionaires?  That is just the reverse of the horrible "prosperity gospel" that some Evangelical Christians have preached.  That was an ideological statement on your part ... not based on reason or evidence.  Not that ideology is bad ... I engage in my own ;-)

[peacewithoutgod]

Peacewithoutgod ... really?  All atheists are millionaires?  That is just the reverse of the horrible "prosperity gospel" that some Evangelical Christians have preached.  That was an ideological statement on your part ... not based on reason or evidence.  Not that ideology is bad ... I engage in my own ;-)

None of that gabble made any sense, Baruch - where did I say or imply that atheists are all rich? I'm an atheist, and I'm just barely existing these days on my own. The "prosperity gospel" which I implied, which you so referred to it as, is practiced by the more ambitious and predatory breed of Christians against their gullible sheep.

What, me be ideological? That is in itself an ideological statement! As for reason and evidence on the prospertiy gospel, there's no dearth of that in most American churches, and those behind the pulpit make the headlines for their practice of frequently enough.

You need a hobby.

[Baruch]

Am I misreading?  Were you overgeneralizing?

"Therefore, poverty does follow religiosity, and that violence follows poverty is an established fact."

[peacewithoutgod]

Am I misreading?  Were you overgeneralizing?

"Therefore, poverty does follow religiosity, and that violence follows poverty is an established fact."

Yes, you misread me. No, I did not overgeneralize, (technically I'm not sure that's a real word, or validly applicable). But to generalize, poor education leads to poverty, and poverty leads to poorer education, and from that cometh violence. I was better educated than I ever was lucky. See my update.

[g2perk]

To all, Religious people are the ones to blame for everything wrong today. Now Religion is the only way to find GOD but more importantly a Relationship with Him is what changes ones mind..

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

[peacewithoutgod]

To all, Religious people are the ones to blame for everything wrong today. Now Religion is the only way to find GOD but more importantly a Relationship with Him is what changes ones mind..

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Now, whatever do you mean by that? How can I have a relationship with somebody who doesn't exist? Do you really think people here haven't considered any possible argument you could ever give that would ever convince us otherwise?

We don't dismiss your assertion that such a person exists out of hand, but we are all too familiar with the anecdotes and logically fallacious arguments which is all a deity apologist can offer as an excuse for evidence. Just because I cannot prove your claim is false (because it is by design unfalsifiable) doesn't mean I will not always come overwhelmingly closer to disproving it than you ever will at proving it. Beginning with your No True Scotsman fallacy on others who claim your god - they may be more "religious" than you (however you define that), but my guess is that your group builds tax-free meeting places at the expense of secular taxpayers, and you don't protest political actions which support your beliefs.

Also, on account of your beliefs, you will never make any hard and honest evaluations regarding the true social impact of social, political, and educational policies which help you maintain your deity delusion, but will cling forever to the ideological fantasies which whitewash them in your eyes.

[g2perk]

Nice wording...Okay for one you trying to disprove GOD tells me you know something about GOD. The real proof that GOD lives is not in any secular minds or educational facilities, the proof is in the man that walks and lives his life with the mind set of Pleasing GOD not man. The fruit of the tree should tell you what kind of tree your dealing with. Right..Open your mind. Now as for as my group as you say, we are people that don't need tax payers money For a meeting place because A REAL GOD meets his people any where. And GOD DOES not need to protest to get people to believe , people that believe protest.



Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

[peacewithoutgod]

Nice wording...Okay for one you trying to disprove GOD tells me you know something about GOD.

I don't need to disprove your god, the burden of proof is on the claimant - which happens to be you.

The real proof that GOD lives is not in any secular minds or educational facilities, the proof is in the man that walks and lives his life with the mind set of Pleasing GOD not man.

Now that sort of reasoning is mighty circular - how do you not make yourself dizzy with it?

Doing a great job of pleasing an imaginary friend does not in any way make him real outside of your own head.

Do you think it's in any way possible to please your god without pleasing anyone else? You would say yes to that, you would point to stories of such happenings, but I'll bet you never met anyone who can be seen as pleasing god without pleasing others, you never will meet such a person, you never have been such a person, and you never will be. Nobody really does anything good for reasons other than personal satisfaction and for other people than the god who they use to make themselves look properly humble (as they are so taught, believing they cannot accept due credit without being a goat-horned narcissist).

The fruit of the tree should tell you what kind of tree your dealing with. Right..Open your mind.

I did, and that's when I began asking questions. I read your bible, all of it. Don't try it yourself unless you're prepared to deal with what you'll find there! The Tree of Knowledge has its price, but it is very rich fruit, and it innoculates you well against such nonsense as this.

Now as for as my group as you say, we are people that don't need tax payers money For a meeting place because A REAL GOD meets his people any where. And GOD DOES not need to protest to get people to believe , people that believe protest.

But do you in fact keep a tax-free meeting place? If not, then that was a very dodgy answer. Also, do you participate in political actions? I'd caution you to be honest this time, but I've come to understand that those who think they have a personal relationship with a powerful father in the sky are so morally corrupted by their delusions that they truly don't know the difference between honesty and lies. You probably aren't religious, but worse than that - insane!

[g2perk]

This debate is becoming mighty circular...I am not sure who you got your information from but until we are talking the same language we will never understand each other..I am here for greater knowledge and understanding..Question. Do you believe in something much greater than you? If not we are wasting our time. But if you do WHAT.

Believing in GOD is spiritual to me and with that comes wisdom.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

[peacewithoutgod]

This debate is becoming mighty circular...I am not sure who you got your information from but until we are talking the same language we will never understand each other..I am here for greater knowledge and understanding..Question. Do you believe in something much greater than you? If not we are wasting our time. But if you do WHAT.

You're right about the circular, and why do you argue in such a circular fashion? Do you think it's really possible for you to defend your position without the use of circular logic? If not, then maybe it's time for you to reconsider your beliefs.

Christianity is still relatively new to human civilization (as it's been referred to in post-agricultural societies), and its 2000-year span occupies only the tiniest fraction of the 3.5 billion year Tree of Life span. That's a conceptual tree for evaluating facts, not religious woo. Oh, I forgot you're not really "religious" because you don't express it through the ritualism of "those people", you're style is to pack your head with so much nonsense that you cannot even see straight - sorry to break it to you, but that's religion too.

Yes, I do believe in something much greater than me. See my avatar, for one. Also, many people on this earth and in my life are far greater and capable than I am. Certainly the Tree of Life is, and the physical forces of the universe which, over 13.8 billion years, gave rise to us. But nothing that cannot be explained in a fashion that can be not only proven, but corroborated, not only  in the same language, but in multiple languages, and more importantly across any cultural barriers. The answers aren't perfect, but they are evaluated on their merits, not on the claim of authority. Your claims will always be unfalsifiable, depending on the claim of authority because they are without any merit that can be evaluated unless it's "proven" by more unfalsifiable claims and appeals to authority down throughout history.

Believing in GOD is spiritual to me and with that comes wisdom.

Just what is it that you consider "spiritual"? Are you aware that there are no possible experiences, no thoughts, no emotions, no motivations, no pangs of conscience, no passions, no talents, and no sense of anything that a person can possibly have which are likely owing to anything other than biochemistry and physics? When that's gone, there's supposed to be a "spirit", but what does the spirit really do anyway? The word  "mind" became popularized as a means of discussing biology while evading the ire of wary church leaders who feared scientific inquiry of the "soul" or "spirit" would usurp their authority, therefore they are all synonymous.

Believing in God (do you really think your all-caps impresses?) makes you wise, does it? Spending hours each week reading the same old book, sitting with the same old crowd, hearing the same old voices in your ear, and tuning out the ideas from everyone else without even evaluating them with an open mind, dismissing them without further thought with the assurance of authorities which owe their claims to other authorities with no hard merit. It keeps the same old ideas alive for thousands of years, and that really means something because other ideas haven't been maintained for so long! Too bad you couldn't do such a good job at preserving the ideas of the flat earth, geocentrism, spontaneous generation, the benefits of bloodletting, divine right of kings, slavery, human sacrifice (which your bible is full of btw), the stoning of adulterers, and witchcraft as the cause of disease. How very wise you surely are!

Some old wisdom is good because it has been tested by time. You would say that your biblical wisdom and the ideas which you encrust your head with are also time-tested, but the difference is that you never, ever test them - you enshrine them in faith! Wisdom is improved only through such testing which your ideas lack, and this is why only a relative few ideas are considered good for thousands of years.

Please come back again, but try to do better than feeble attempts at turning my critic of your arguments back on me. I'm sure you can do better than that!