Religion
Related: About this forumIs Atheism Only for the Upper Class? Socioeconomic Differences Among the Religiously Unaffiliated
Posted: 04/24/2013 10:22 am
Daniel Cox.
Research Director, Public Religion Research Institute
The religiously unaffiliated are an increasingly important part of the American religious and cultural landscape. They account for nearly 1-in-5 American adults, and although they turn out to vote at lower rates than other religious groups, they are having a profound effect on American electoral politics, accounting for one-quarter of Obama's vote in the past election.
Yet, although the politics of the unaffiliated -- comparatively liberal on cultural questions and increasingly Democratic in voting preferences -- suggest that they are a fairly homogenous group, there are actually three subsets among the unaffiliated that are demographically and socially distinct. In 2012, the American Values Survey identified three distinct groups among the unaffiliated: secular Americans (39 percent), self-identified atheists and agnostics (36 percent), and unattached believers (23 percent). The accompanying report detailed the significant religious differences between these groups, but there are major socio-economic differences separating them as well.
One of the more notable findings from this analysis is that atheists and agnostics have significantly higher socio-economic status than either secular Americans or unattached believers. Nearly half (45 percent) of atheists and agnostics have at least a 4-year college education, compared to 27 percent of secular Americans and just 17 percent of unattached believers. Similarly, 45 percent of atheists and agnostics have household incomes of at least $75,000 a year. Less than 3-in-10 secular Americans (28 percent) and roughly 1-in-5 (21 percent) unattached believers have household incomes in this range. Finally, nearly one-third (29 percent) of atheists and agnostics report that they are upper or upper-middle class, while only 28 percent say they are working class or lower class. Only 11 percent of secular Americans and 13 percent of unattached believers identify as upper or upper-middle class. Half (50 percent) of seculars and nearly 6-in-10 (57 percent) unattached believers identify as working class or lower class.
Why are atheists and agnostics so much more economically advantaged than their unaffiliated counterparts? Older scholarship pointed to the role that higher education plays in undermining traditional religious beliefs, but recent research has found that higher education mostly affects religious participation, not belief. A more recent theory, developed by Pippa Norris and Ronald Inglehart, proposes that populations with a greater degree of economic uncertainty tend to have higher rates of religious observance. Norris and Inglehart argue that "societies where people's daily lives are shaped by the threat of poverty, disease, and premature death remain as religious today as centuries earlier." The authors were primarily interested in making cross-national comparisons, but the theory can be applied to subnational communities as well.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-cox/is-atheism-only-for-the-upper-class-socioeconomic-differences-among-the-religiously-unaffiliated_b_3146894.html?utm_hp_ref=religion
Let's discuss privilege.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)rug
(82,333 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)rug
(82,333 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,681 posts)since their lives are usually pretty good without one.
rug
(82,333 posts)I remember from sociology classes a whole variety of class differences, from white toilet paper versus patterned, bowling versus tennis, tv versus movies. The differences extended to religion and irreligion.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)Part of the reason that the churches do better among the working to poor classes is that the church is often their one, sole means of getting aid and services. I am not saying the atheists have to or even should form a church, but there is nothing that says a non religious non profit cannot open up a soup kitchen.
Phillip McCleod
(1,837 posts)..although that is changing. an improvement i think we can all agree. as consciousness of atheism as an identifiable social category continues to grow internationally, i think we can expect many experiments in secular social work succeed and grow.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)Obviously there is no single atheism like there is no single Christianity or Islam, but some of the most ardent atheists I have encountered seem particularly dismissive of any culture or practice that differs from their own. They condemn others, particularly outside the US, while showing no capacity to critique injustice wrought by our own imperialism, both military and cultural. Of course Many religious followers do the same. Those who do so embody exactly what I despise about most organized religion: the idea that they are superior to others based on their relationship with belief or disbelief. All, probably not even most, atheists don't think or behave that way, but some do. I personally see no difference between that and the intolerance displayed by adherents of different religions.
I come from a family where we were taught never to speak ill of another person's religion. In the early 20th century, my grandfather, a Catholic, forbid any religious intolerance to be voiced in his house. While I do not attend religious services of any kind, I took that lesson to heart. I don't care what religion a person practices or doesn't practice. What I care about are particular political positions someone takes. I care how that person treats others, and I judge them as individuals, not because I ascribe a certain set of beliefs to anyone I might associate with that group of believers or non-believers. So I suspect the problem is not really atheism at all but the cultural ethnocentrism that characterizes so many in the United States and Britain. People simply evoke different justifications for their own sense of cultural superiority.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Oh, wait, there are more people, far more people in asia, and the levels of religiousity are generally much lower, and China, for example, has a far larger proportion of their population who are not only not religious but self described atheists than most other 1st world nations.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)right? That's quite different from people choosing not to believe. Besides, China is as 1st world as it gets.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)And the major "religions" of the region, specifically many forms of Buddhism and in China Taoism are generally deity-free. And no it isn't the nasty commies, it is the historical and cultural development of east asia. Japan is very similar and has no "bad commie" explanation.
About 70% of Japanese profess no religious membership,[9][10] according to Johnstone (1993:323), 84% of the Japanese claim no personal religion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Japan
red scare fail.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)I appreciate the information about atheism being more widespread than I realized, but these again are First Word nations.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)But read up on religiosity in east asia. my claim does not depend at all on the question of are buddhism and taoism actually religions or philosophies, that is a side issue that I happen to find interesting, it is a claim about how the population of this region polls on religiosity: very low.
onager
(9,356 posts)"Fifty per cent of Japanese are Buddhist. Fifty per cent are Shinto. And fifty per cent have no religion at all."
OK, some pedant will point out the obvious - the % don't add up. I'm tempted to say they certainly do add up, for Japanese culture. And anyone who disagrees needs to check their Western mathematical privilege and re-consider their linear Occidental mindset. Or some such BS...
(I generally just laugh at all "check your privilege" demands on the Internet. Only about 35% of the world, IIRC, currently has internet access. So if you're chiding me for my privilege via your high-speed connection, I respectfully request that you go pound sand. Especially if you have >10,000 DU posts - which tells me you not only have good Internet access, but also a bunch of leisure time to spend on it.)
Anyway, my hotel had a nice little Buddhist shrine right outside. And just a few steps away, a giant torii (gateway arch) leading to a Shinto shrine. That hotel was the Capitol Tokyu, located right across the street from "Koreatown," adding another cultural glitch to the mix.
I also visited the largest Buddhist temple in Tokyo. Where for a few donated coins I got to breathe the Holy Smoke (incense) and for a few more coins dip into some sort of Buddhist holy water at a fountain. I think. Since I am a Militant/Fundamentalist Atheist, none of this bothered me one way or the other. I was just trying to be polite and not offend my hosts.
What did impress me were the crowded little streets around the temple - jammed with tiny shops selling every kind of Buddha kitsch imaginable.
Aside from American TV evangelists, I've only seen that level of Divine Hucksterism in one other place I've been on Earth - the streets around the Vatican in Rome.
Leontius
(2,270 posts)could you provide some numbers to back that claim.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)As the google is once again broken for you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism
see "east asia"
This is common knowledge, that is for those who care to know, and does not need citations.
Leontius
(2,270 posts)yep no problems with your burden of proof.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Except of course if one is willfully ignorant.
Leontius
(2,270 posts)you provided. It's incomplete information about religious observance in Asia' it's confused explanation of the three countries it does include, in short it's complete failure to offer anything of value to the discussion of religion in an are as extensive as Asia. Willful ignorance indeed.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)TOP 10 ATHEIST POPULATIONS:
China 47%
Japan 31%
Czech Republic 30%
France 29%
...
Source WIN-Gallup. 2012.
http://www.wingia.com/web/files/news/14/file/14.pdf
Phillip McCleod
(1,837 posts)increasingly so, as well. it hasn't made headlines, but the OP rug has been kind enough to keep us all appraised of events in bangledesh, where atheists are being targeted en masse as scapegoats for the nation's internecine religious and ideological conflicts.
ex-muslim atheism is on if anything a more rapid upward trajectory than ex-christian atheism.
if some atheists are *vocal* about their POV, especially on the internet, it is because in daily life we do not have that *privilege*. i suggest rather than attacking any and every atheist you can find..
..you get used to it.
we're not gonna stop.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)just the intolerant ones. As I said, I have no more problem with atheism than any other belief. It's all the same to me. Jew, Muslim, Catholic, Lutheran, worshipers of Canbomble or Santeria, agnosticism, or atheism. It's like brown or blonde hair for all I care. What matters to me is a person's views about politics and the world, and what he or she does in pursuit of them.
Phillip McCleod
(1,837 posts)(B) you the hell are you to judge me?
perhaps i have the wrong idea about you.. maybe you're right. maybe you don't call every atheist a 'bigot'. but you called *me* a 'bigot' and i am not. i am an atheist, and i'm unapologetic about it. yes, i criticize religious *belief* because it is based on unfounded assumptions about nature.. human and otherwise. i confront that.
you don't like that i confront that.
therefore, in your eyes, i am a 'bigot', as you said.
until you retract that statement and apologize, let it be known that i consider *you* to be an anti-atheist bigot. you can't change my mind any more than i can change yours. *you* are the intolerant one. intolerant of reasoned critiques that oppose your viewpoint and you react with a jerk of the knee and spout off on the internet like a tough guy. well i'm a tough guy too, so where does that leave us?
with you 'ignoring' me again, i hope?
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)and I have never put you on ignore. I could always start though. Any differences of opinion I have with you are entirely unrelated to your atheism. As I said, I share your outrage about human rights abuses wrought by fundamentalist Islamism. What I object to is your insistence that those abuses represent Islam as a whole or tell us everything we need to know about Muslims in history.
Phillip McCleod
(1,837 posts)..anyone would have lost track by now. you have my sympathies.
and i have never 'insisted' that all muslims are abusive. how many times must this be repeated before it finally sinks in? how many pointed snarks must float by before the light bulb goes on?
if i oppose the idea of neoliberal economics, does that mean i hate president clinton, who signed NAFTA?
atheists oppose the very *idea* of religion. we.. no *I* think that religious beliefs have a net negative influence on society, because they hold a widespread and accepted.. no.. *privileged* position in said society, and are *commonly* used to justify the most horrific of deeds, as well as noble ones.
in other words, religion doesn't work to make people behave in a more civilized fashion toward one another. they are counter-productive to social progress. they're *in the fucking way*.
i suggest they get out of the way, because good people are coming through. good.. *determined* people.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)in saying that my views had something to do with the circumstances of Amina's life, I don't have a lot of confidence that you read those posts clearly. While I don't remember a specific conversation with you, I know very what my views are. Animosity toward entire religious and/or ethnic groups is bigotry. Being right or wrong about Amina's life has nothing to do with whether I consider a point of view bigoted. I myself never claimed to know her circumstances in Tunisia. I pointed out that there were thousands of Tunisian women engaged in political activism before Amina came into the public spotlight, and they continue to do so.
This is the first time today I've seen you say all Muslims are not abusive. You attributed human rights atrocities to Islam itself, not to fundamentalist extremism or certain individuals. I don't think it is possible to claim respect for Muslims, or some Muslims, while hating Islam. Muslim is a religious and ethnic identify. Islam is key to how they see themselves. So how is it possible to claim respect for a people when you despise part of their core identity?
There is no question that human beings have engaged in all kinds of horrendous acts in the world in the name of religion. As I said in a prior post, I see that as a justification like any other. Does the fact we waged war in Iraq in the name of democracy mean that system of government is inherently bad? I don't think so. Moreover, the world cannot be rid of religion. While I fully respect your right to be an atheist, I see no point to working for or wishing for the end to religion. It's never going to happen. I prefer to focus on particular abuses-- homophobia, rape, domestic violence, slavery, violence against women, unequal opportunity--wherever they occur and work toward carrying out solutions.
So if you want to make me your enemy, that is your choice. My views are what they are, and they have nothing to do with you personally.
Phillip McCleod
(1,837 posts)in fact i feel like we're finally having a real conversation. i imagine this is why the religion group was originally invented, whatever it has become.. perhaps we just don't know each other. it happens.
i'm no bigot, and neither are some of the other people who have been called 'bigots' for 'broadbrushing' islam. we get your point, ok? we get it. we have muslim friends too, that we care about very much. we all do don't we, in this pluralistic socity?
but islam gets no pass from atheists. ok, it's like this.. whatever religion it is? we don't *believe*. there is knowledge, and on the subject of faith, the one broadbrush we can paint with about atheists is that we're all agnostic. we don't know. some of us don't care. i happen to be interested. i've read the koran, and every other holy book i could get my hands on. atheists vary but there is one thing that unites us. we don't *believe*. it's beliefs that we have a beef with, not believers..
.. at least, not until they kill or oppress or discriminate in the name of their skydaddy.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)and I certainly respect your atheist views. I consider your right to hold them every bit as important as someone else's right to practice Islam, Judaism, Christianity, or any other religion.
My problem is with broad brushing. That shouldn't be done toward atheists, Muslims, or anyone else. Interpretations of the Koran, like any religious text, vary widely. I pointed you to the article on Sufism because it is so different from the fundamentalist extremism that most of us in the West are so familiar with. http://mycaravanofdreams.com/2011/07/21/how-many-sufis-are-there-in-islam-by-stephen-schwartz/
I posted that article earlier this week after hearing about how Islam was inherently violent and was to blame for the actions of the two guys in Boston. The fact that Islam has given rise to great intellectual openness in the past tells me that the problems you rightly point to are not a necessary part of the religion. It's important to understand the context of colonialism, Western backed dictatorships and occupations that have given rise to fundamentalist extremism. To imagine it is all about a religious text misses most of the story.
In terms of religion, I don't even have a label for myself. I don't go to religious services of any kind. I don't know if I believe in God, but I don't refuse to accept the possibility. I suppose I would like to be able to have faith because It seems to bring many people a great deal of comfort, but I cannot summon it.
My views on religion are largely historical and sociological. I consider the existence of a deity the least important aspect of religiosity. For me, it's importance lies in its role in society, for good and bad. My background in history, and Latin America in particular, has taught me that religion plays a far more complex role in society than many here understand. Among its applications is an ideology of empowerment for resisting oppression. That certainly has been the case for peoples of indigenous and African decent throughout the Americas.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)because I don't proclaim them superior to religious believers.
Phillip McCleod
(1,837 posts).. 
..
but like the amina thread, i wasn't sure if i was being sarcastic.
that aside do you deny that you target atheists in your responses? do we, in general, say things that are objectionable to you?
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)My objections have nothing to do with your atheism but what I see as culturally imperialistic attitudes toward foreign cultures. As I pointed out, that is hardly unique among Americans. I guess I just expect more from people on this site.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)whatever.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)Yeah, I think it's probably just run of the mill American cultural superiority. I haven't had the honor of discussions with Asian atheists. I have had some fascinating discussions with really interesting American atheists, and some others who seem more like the typical American or Brit, convinced of their own cultural superiority. Perhaps the fact I note it comes from what is communicated in the OP. I imagine they have a higher education level and I therefore expect more from them.
Phillip McCleod
(1,837 posts)..that atheists are exhibiting colonial/imperialistic attitudes toward 3rd world believers.
i pity them. i pity their lack of choice. and when, like alexander aan and amina of femen, they confront religious bullshit *anyway* and pay the price..
..then i consider them *heroes*.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)I am neither American nor British by birth or upbringing, I am not an upperclass, and never mind where I stand on nudity.
As far as I am aware they officially put me on Ignore twice already.
Phillip McCleod
(1,837 posts)..in fact..
..
i have no running water. but i do have internet, thanks to a friendly neighbor.
yep. no toilet neither, but i'm working on it. (don't worry, i and my two sons have lots of practice, having lived in a yurt for >5 years)
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)Never mind absence of running water or a toilet. Obviously you don't know how to set your priorities straight! And I bet you are White American MALE!!! There, everything else is irrelevant.
P.S. (((hugs))). I can only hope your situation improves. Can't really do anything else but say how sorry I am. (((Hugs)))
Phillip McCleod
(1,837 posts)i love you, backscatter. but don't worry.. i've been thru worse and this way i can actually save money by minimizing rent to $300/mo. plan is to move wherever the kiddos want to attend college with the cash saved by living like some sort of .. of.. of.. SAVAGES! 
this town is tough but at last i have f/t work making more than min. wage, so there's light at the end of the tunnel.
the 'neighbor' is also a friend.. how i found the place, in fact.. once the septic and well are back online after 7+ years of neglect, and the drywall is up.. no more trotting the 1/4 mile for #2 (#1 is easy.. just go outside).
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)has anyone in FEMEN paid besides Amina? Amina is a Muslim you know. Has she denounced her faith? I don't think so. I believe she, like thousands of Tunisian activists, is protesting policies she fears will be instated if the Salafists seize power in Tunisia.
Phillip McCleod
(1,837 posts)really? what do you know about those women? who the hell are *you* to sit in judgement over them? how the hell do you know who they are?
do you have a problem with ex-muslim female secularists (not even atheists, since some of them are muslim, some christian, some a&a).. staging protests against *common* misogynistic religious *beliefs*? does that bother you on some deep level that we should all know about?
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)And you don't seem to be responding to what I wrote. Here is my post:
How does that involve passing judgment over anyone? I asked a question. I am not aware of any FEMEN member but Amina facing negative consequences for their actions. I could care less if a woman is a practicing Muslim or a secularist. That is entirely her choice. The fact is, however, the majority of women in Muslim majority countries do practice Islam. I don't consider them inferior because of their religious views. I was pointing out that I have no knowledge of Amina denouncing Islam, and that if she has not, some of the posts in this and other threads reveal a profound disrespect for her, since she is also Muslim.
You continue to associate a lack of hatred for Islam with hostility toward women's rights. I support Muslim women's rights to protest whatever they choose. I support their right to dress how they choose, whether than involves wearing a veil or not. I also support their right to be free from bombs dropped by the US military on places like Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Yemen. I support their rights to self-determination, both politically and culturally. Self determination means THEY decide, not me and not you.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)it.
At least you firmly place her together with other Tunisian women protesting against instalment of religiously inspired policies. That's a progress.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,311 posts)Attacked by anti-gay protesters when they staged a counter-demonstration in favour of same sex marriage: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/19/topless-nuns-anti-gay-catholic-protesters-paris-femen_n_2158033.html
Arrested for protesting Vatican anti-gay policies: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/topless-women-protest-vatican-gay-adoption-criticized-article-1.1239197
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)
LostOne4Ever
(9,288 posts)All the "nones" need to mark atheist on the next census if they want a better chance of making more $$$ 
If im not mistaken, there has been a connection between economic success and religiosity for a long time, what I found new about this article is that there is now research showing connection between higher education and atheism might be incorrect.
Guess it goes back to the correlation does not mean causation warning they gave us time and time again. Higher socio-economic status leads to a increase in both secularism as well as going to college apparently.
Still, it surprises me because I have read many "de-conversion" stories where the person says it was by studying history, astronomy, biology, or even comparative religions that they lost faith. So I would figure that there would be a small influence. But I guess not.
PS:
Im curious what the American Values study means by Secular unaffiliated. What is the difference between a secular and an agnostic atheist or an unattached believer?
If they don't believe in any gods they would be agnostic atheists, if they believed in any god(s) they would either be agnostic believers/unattached believers.
The third category is confusing.
struggle4progress
(118,281 posts)
Skittles
(153,150 posts)REGARDLESS of pressure from family, friends, society, etc.
struggle4progress
(118,281 posts)... Today, roughly 1-in-5 (19%) Americans currently report that they are religiously unaffiliated ... Interviews were conducted by telephone among a random sample of 3,003 adults 18 years of age or older in the continental United State ...
So the sample includes about 570 religiously unaffiliated. The HuffPo article asserts
... In 2012, the American Values Survey identified three distinct groups among the unaffiliated: secular Americans (39 percent), self-identified atheists and agnostics (36 percent), and unattached believers (23 percent) ... Nearly half (45 percent) of atheists and agnostics have at least a 4-year college education, compared to 27 percent of secular Americans and just 17 percent of unattached believers. Similarly, 45 percent of atheists and agnostics have household incomes of at least $75,000 a year. Less than 3-in-10 secular Americans (28 percent) and roughly 1-in-5 (21 percent) unattached believers have household incomes in this range ...
This translates approximately as:
The 2012 American Values Survey interviewed 222 secular Americans, 205 self-identified atheists and agnostics, and 131 unattached believers. 92 of the atheists and agnostics had at least a 4-year college education, compared to 60 of the secular Americans and just 22 of the unattached believers. Similarly, 92 of the atheists and agnostics had household incomes of at least $75,000 a year. 62 of the secular Americans and 27 of the unattached believers had household incomes in this range
So the percentage of folk in each category with household income of at least $75K is about the same as the percentage of folk in each category with at least a 4-year college education. That seems credible, and it might suggest fairly little influence on economic success, other than education
I'm not so sure about the cross-class comparisons though: the sample size seems a bit small
edhopper
(33,575 posts)that religion is comforting to those in lesser economic straights I also think of Maslow's hierarchy of needs.
For me at least, becoming an atheist took time and effort. I spent time reading and thinking about God and religion. It took me some time before I came to the conclusion that God did not exist.
If I was struggling to eat and keep a roof, I doubt I would have had the time to pursue this course of critical thinking.
Leontius
(2,270 posts)and see no evidence of their prayers or hope answered yet remain committed to their belief. Is their process of keeping faith based really on any less of a course critical thinking and searching than the one you followed ?
edhopper
(33,575 posts)Though that is besides the point. We are talking about aggregate groups. Why are there MORE atheist among the higher social-economic groups?
I posited one possible contributing factor. I don't have and hard evidence to say this is a major piece of this question. So it is more of a hypothesis for people to consider.
Deep13
(39,154 posts)...while those without those advantages are less likely to abandon their religion. Part of it is because poor and almost poor people are more likely to have a social network centered on their church.
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)Or more specifically, do the most unscrupulous religious leaders target the poor, the desperate and the vulnerable specifically for proselytization and indoctrination?
I think that could explain this phenomenon.
rug
(82,333 posts)Not that anecdotal evidence is dispositive.
I would think that is not generally true because people are not generally stupid. People do not generally adhere long to institutions marked primarily by threats.
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)Just remember, even if you're bankrupt and desperate, give to your televangelist! GIVE! GIVE! GIVE!
rexcat
(3,622 posts)Most people who are atheists were skeptical in their early teens so my question is do the people who are skeptical at an early age come from "privilege" or does being skeptical lead to being "privileged?" I have never seen this hypothesis asked. That might be an interesting study.
I was skeptical at an early age. I come from middle class roots. My father was an officer in the military and did not make a lot of money and my mom worked as a nurse. My dad was a fighter pilot and electrical engineer with a masters degree and would be considered part of the professional class. Both of my parents were theists. I came from a dual income family from the late 50's - early 60's which was not typical of the day but was typical for military families. Of the five siblings in our household only two of us ended up as atheists. In fact two of my siblings are somewhat intolerant atheists and have been very vocal about it. When I finally had the realization that I was an atheist and not an agnostic I was in my early 20's. I was in the military at the time and had taken only a few college classes. I did not come from "privilege" money wise or via education.
At this time I could be considered "privileged" based on our household income (well north of $75,000/year), educational levels of my wife and me, and our net worth. My wife is a wayward catholic and definitely not an atheist. My two sons who are 17 years of age are atheists. They might be considered "privileged" but I think that has to do more with their upbringing than the income or educational level of their parents.
