America's 'Religious Nones' Are Growing Quickly. Should Republicans Worry?

[cbayer]

http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/06/12/413654984/americas-religious-nones-are-growing-quickly-should-republicans-worry

JUNE 12, 2015 5:03 AM ET

DANIELLE KURTZLEBEN


People gather for the Reason Rally on the National Mall March 24, 2012 in Washington, DC.
BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP/Getty Images

Emily Schulz isn't religious.

"I see religion as something really personal," said Schulz, 26, who works at a nonprofit in Washington, D.C. "So the fact that it is a requirement in politics always seems unusual to me."

She said she "oscillates between atheist and agnostic," but she knows it could be many years before she votes for a political figure who shares her (lack of) religious beliefs.

Schulz is not alone. She is part of a growing group of American adults who do not identify with any religion. More than one-in-five American adults say so now, the highest in U.S. history. They are being identified as the religious "nones," so called for their lack of religious affiliation. As they grow in size, they are also gaining political power.

more at link

[Yorktown]

1. Your excerpts are not helping support the title

(and besides, the stats showing religion is heading south have already been posted n times)

What you left out is the key statement linking it to politics:

people who claimed no religious affiliation voted overwhelmingly for President Obama — 70 percent to 26 percent.

In short, atheists are on the rise, and they vote Democrat

(which shouldn't surprise anyone as long as Republicans will support young earth creationism)

[cbayer]

2. FTR, I just cut and pasted the article and then posted it without comment.

It is true that the nones, which include non-believers, tend to vote democratic and hold rather liberal/progressive ideas.

That's good for us and not so good for the republicans.

[Warren Stupidity]

4. "That's good for us and not so good for the republicans."

So we should work together to convince more people to shed their religious superstitions. Good to see you are finally coming around to the anti-theist point of view!

[Yorktown]

5. I contested your choice of quotes

[cbayer]

6. I always just paste the first four paragraphs and provide a link.

It was not my choice of quotes.

[Yorktown]

7. Then I contest your method of quoting

[cbayer]

8. What? I use the most objective method possible so that others can draw their own conclusions.

You can contest it, I guess, but I'm not sure what grounds you would have for doing that.

[Yorktown]

9. My grounds are training. Text summary is a teachable skill.

[cbayer]

10. It is not my goal to provide text summary, though I am quite good at that.

It is my goal to provide the beginning of the article with a link. This prevents any unnecessary editorialization or injection of my own POV.

You are free to present articles in any way you choose.

[Yorktown]

11. Well then, you are choosing not to be helpful

When you submit texts, you presumably read them.

If so, a summary would gve a reason to click on your link.

That would be helpful as you do post many OP's without a clear rationale for doing so, IMNSHO.

[cbayer]

12. Click on the link or not. Makes no difference to me.

I post OP's because I think they may be of interest to some members or might elicit an interesting discussion. I'm not here to provide you with a summary or with the hope that you click on the link.

[Yorktown]

13. Besides the point

I would hope you, or any poster, would post OP's because they think they might be of interest or elicit a discussion.

Providing a summary would enable readers to judge if they should click on the link.

Unless you believe everyone has an unlimited amount of time to browse the web.

[cbayer]

14. Meh, I'm not interested in posting a summary and am not here to

save members time.

If the first 4 paragraphs interest you, you can click the link and read more.

If not, move along.

But, thanks for the advice!

[Warren Stupidity]

3. she will be back to claim that the nones are not losing their religion

they are all becoming unitarians or they are still believers but just don't like organized religion or they are all "spiritual" or some other excuse for pretending what is happening isn't happening.

This study say otherwise: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0121454
In four large, nationally representative surveys (N = 11.2 million), American adolescents and emerging adults in the 2010s (Millennials) were significantly less religious than previous generations (Boomers, Generation X) at the same age.