A Religious Revival Could Help Reinvigorate the Liberal West
Even atheists might prefer time-tested faiths over illiberal upstarts.
Atheist though I am, my wife's rabbi insisted on parading me around on his shoulders as part of recent Simchat Torah festivities. As a volunteer security guard for the synagogue, I was weighed down with weapons and body armor, so it's good he doesn't skip leg day during his trips to the gym. Less vigorous was my adult son's baptism at a Tucson church earlier this year. My Jewish wife, Wendy, and I were bemused by congratulations from members of the congregation on Anthony's thoughtful pre-dousing speech. We knew we'd raised a good man, but we had little to do with his faith. For that matter, I'm not really sure how an atheist married to a once-secular woman ended up in a multi-faith household.
But I'm not alone in seeing changes in the religious landscape and (maybe) a religious revival. And while I'm not a believer, I see people grasping for meaning. For me, the reinvigoration of time-tested belief systems compatible with a free society beats the adoption of newer and explicitly illiberal religion substitutes.
You are reading The Rattler from J.D. Tuccille and Reason. Get more of J.D.'s commentary on government overreach and threats to everyday liberty.
Evidence for a Religious Revival
"From February 2024 to February 2025, there was a sharp rise in the share of U.S. adults who say religion is gaining influence in American life," Pew Research reported this week. Last year, 18 percent of respondents—the lowest level seen after two decades of decline—said religion was gaining influence in American life. This year, 31 percent said religion is gaining influence—the highest figure in 15 years.
Gallup reported similar results in June, finding that 34 percent of U.S. adults believe religion is increasing its influence in American life, up from 20 percent a year earlier. Clearly, a good many people perceive a reversal in fortunes for traditional religions that have long been shedding adherents.
But it's not just public perception. In February, Pew reported that "after many years of steady decline, the share of Americans who identify as Christians shows signs of leveling off—at least temporarily—at slightly above six-in-ten."
Youth and Faith
Pew also found support for the much-reported story about younger men shaking up traditional religious roles by growing more religious while women, who historically anchored families to faith, continue to become more secular. The researchers note "there are signs that the gender gap in religion is narrowing, as it is smaller among younger people than among older Americans," though younger adults as a group are less religious than older ones.
For my son, the journey to faith began in homeschooling lessons about the Enlightenment and the foundations of Western civilization. He concluded the West has become unmoored from its core values and that many of its inhabitants no longer hold the beliefs that let us become free and prosperous.
His impressions were cemented when he briefly attended a private school and watched a large share of his classmates embrace intolerant progressivism. Soon, they were purging one another out of study groups and online chats as deviationists from the groupthink of the moment. If you'd called them religious fanatics, they'd have been offended. But Anthony believed that, in their search for meaning in the world, his classmates had rejected relatively mild and tolerant traditional beliefs only to fill their place with illiberal substitutes that allowed no room for dissent. He preferred traditional faith.
Writing for Australia's Lowy Institute, Intifar Chowdhury observed in August that revivals in traditional religion are occurring among young people around the world. For many of them, faith offers "meaning, stability, and guidance" that they don't find in secular culture. While both men and women are reinvigorating traditional faiths in many places, in countries like the U.S. and Australia, "the Gen Z religious revival is sharply gendered." For young men, "religion, especially traditions with male-led hierarchies, offers them belonging, purpose, and a defined role."
Chowdhury worries that religious revivals may offer fertile ground for populism. But my son first embraced Christianity as a pillar of the liberal Enlightenment, then found further meaning in a theology that connected him with a Creator that, according to the Declaration of Independence, endowed us with "certain unalienable Rights….Among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Pulling Together After October 7
As you might imagine, my wife's journey back to her childhood Judaism followed a different path. She'd never shared my atheism but always retained a belief in God even if she didn't celebrate shabbat or read the Torah. October 7 changed that for her. Like many in Israel, the U.S., and elsewhere, she realized that she was hated and could be hunted as a Jew whether or not she was observant. There's even a term—"October 8th Jew"—referring to those who returned to the community after the terror attack.
"Across the Jewish world, particularly in North America, there's a wave of what they call 'the surge'—people who…are rediscovering their Jewish identity in the aftermath of the October 7 attack," according to Zvika Klein in the Jerusalem Post.
In a sign that the Jewish revival may last, young Jews seem particularly affected. The Jewish campus organization Hillel "is close to breaking its record for highest student participation in its 100-year history," according to Religion Watch. The rival Chabad organization told the same publication that it experienced "an increase of over 40 percent in new students coming through" its chapters' doors.
Traditional Religions and the Alternatives
I've had to make peace with a suddenly multifaith family, though it's been relatively easy. Unlike some atheists—we've all met them—I don't belittle people who embrace religion. My atheism isn't militant; it has more in common with the beliefs of the philosopher Epicurus or with the Deism of the Founders that the existence of a god or gods doesn't matter since there's no evidence that it or they involve themselves in our lives. I don't care much about the issue, so long as nobody foists their beliefs on me.
That makes my version of atheism as compatible with the political traditions of our heavily Deistic Founders as the Christianity that my son sought for its connections to the Enlightenment and the Judaism of my wife that helped spawn Western civilization.
The same can't be said of the modern alternatives that have become popular in certain circles. My son had his run-in with totalitarian progressivism which fueled an Inquisition-like environment at his old school. It's mirrored on parts of the right by an illiberalism that rejects individualism, limited government, and free markets. Now, there are attempts to unify these ideological strains in a distilled post-liberalism that embraces collectivism and authoritarianism. Where that ends is probably something like Republican Paul Ingrassia's and Democrat Graham Platner's shared taste for Nazis.
If there is a religious revival underway, and if it maintains its steam, there's no guarantee it won't lead us in that post-liberal direction. Traditional faiths have certainly been authoritarian in the past. But they've also had some time to have the sharp edges knocked off and prove themselves compatible with free societies; the same can't be said of the alternatives.
As people grasp for meaning in a changing world and look for something to believe, I'll place my hopes on traditional faiths that helped create our civilization over upstart would-be replacements that openly reject it.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
After 12 years of Catholic school including a comparative religions course, I am an atheist, or as I sometimes put it “an ethical Christian” as I see that the core message of religions is the Golden Rule. The rest is decorative and ritual to enhance and support that message. Many need those peripherals to justify commitment to the core.
As long as religions are not aggressive or intrusive they can provide a great benefit by promoting good behavior. Only when the wrapper becomes more important than the message do they cause significant harm, e.g. creationism or jihad.
as I see that the core message of religions is the Golden Rule. The rest is decorative and ritual
Ahh yes, the post-modern interpretation that ignores every line of the Bible, reducing it to an easily palatable (and more importantly extremely flexible) moral message of "just kinda be sorta generally nice to each other."
Which has been abused and raped and weaponized in the name of Progressivism and Moral Relativity (or, if you prefer, Satan) as if to declare, "I am my own god, and I decide what's good and right" while that tiny inescapable part of you still rightfully fears the TRUE God leading you to falsely rationalize to yourself that He'll be cool about all your sins if declare you're following in His footsteps because you're just kinda sorta generally nice to others.
Which is especially useful for pursing social/political goals, but neither of which God cares about even slightly. You have been misled, BigT.
As long as religions are not aggressive or intrusive they can provide a great benefit by promoting good behavior.
Buddy, I've got a newsflash for you - both God and Jesus are aggressive and intrusive. I'm going to hit you with some Gospel now. Book of Matthew, Chapter 10.
"Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon the earth; I have come not to bring peace but a sword."
The whole pacifist/eternally tolerant/accepting of all interpretation of Christ is missing the point: God wants you to be with Him in eternity. Jesus opened the door, previously closed forever by Original Sin, for you to be with Him and He did so willingly facing persecution, torture and death to make it happen. This is how aggressively He approaches the subject. This is why He makes it a point of intruding on every aspect of your life, desperately trying to remind you how to be a good person of faith and love and justice and beauty.
And He knew that doing so was going to bring division and disruption as the moral and spiritual demands of following Christ would always be at odds with the sinful nature of our earthly existence. "You will be hated by all because of my name, but whoever endures to the end will be saved." You'll have society and politics telling you this or that, He's telling you to reject it. You'll risk friendship and family, He's telling you that there's something more important. "Whoever does not take up his cross and follow after me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it and whoever loses his life for My sake will find it."
God wants this so badly and so passionately, because of His absolute Love for you - and He will forgive your every flaw and failure so long as you are willing to repent and make that effort to WANT to be with Him as well.
When you go to meet Him, saying "Well, I did what Christ said and was just kinda sorta generally nice to people," I'm telling you man, at that moment you'll realize you missed the point of ALL of it.
If you want man, we can talk about this stuff. I'm not trying to be magnanimous, I'm not trying to be condescending, I'm not trying to be shaming or derisive or anything else. I'm not trying to be anything other than one Catholic trying to do right by Him, by doing right by others. The way He asked us to.
" What has been abused and raped..."
What has been abused and raped are thousand of children and innocents by bible thumping cultist.
Indeed, that has tragically been the case by the wayward and sinful. It doesn't change a word I said, because all I'm doing is repeating what He said.
The call of Satan is one easy to fall prey, LB. The question is whether they are truly repentant. I think they are. Or at least I hope they are.
I wonder if the same can be said by those who encourage abuse and rape of children in the name of a rainbow pagan cult, and its godless enablers who will happily abort/mutilate their children in service to it.
I’ll see your pedophilic catholic priests and raise you the entire democrat party (the party of pedophilia and rape in general).
I re-raise you the entire republican party. Among politicians, it seems statistically that Libertarians are the safest to have around kid at approx 2% of politicians committing sex crimes against children; while republicans represent 67% of politicians committing sex crimes against children.
https://www.whoismakingnews.com/#source-data
Total Offenders by Political Affiliation
(Category = "Politicians" only.)
Republican 67.4 %
Unknown 16.9 %
Democrat 13.5 %
Libertarian 2.2 %
the entire republican party
...
Republican 67.4 %.
...
After Feb. 15, 2023. In the US. Not including the gays with all the child porn.
lol
What has been abused and raped are thousand of children and innocents by bible thumping cultist.
Not nearly as much as those in public schools.
Yes, religion is inherently violent, as it is a mental artifact that was created in more authoritarian, violent times. More advanced, more social societies, especially in Europe, therefore reject it. But america is growing up too, it just needs to hear the lesson extra loud. The lesson currently resides in the white house and it is at max volume.
especially in Europe
Yeah, those enlightened Muslims are ensuring the EU is disposing Christianity. Have fun in your mandated hijab.
You progs are broken.
I know that conservatards are broken and inept when it comes to using technology that isn't from 1933, but there are sources of information out there that demonstrate that there are no mandated hijabs in Europe.
there are no mandated hijabs in Europe.
Yet.
The right wing paranoia. History is not on your side, unfortunately. Texas will be blue before that happens.
Nope. But you might be dead.
Your desire for my death is delicious. It indicates that you are punished with being a really, really bad person, so i already won.
Check out what they're doing in Africa sometime.
Yes, religion is inherently violent
No, it's not. At least, not in the way you're thinking. I can see how it's easy to think that, but the ease of that thinking comes from not having done much of it. It's not inherently violent - it's necessarily violent. Because the battle against sin is one that requires constant fighting. The Kingdom of God vs the kingdom of man.
Since the fall of man, we were locked in an eternal spiritual combat. Cain and Abel, Jacob and Esau, the Israelites and the Ameleks, all the way to Jesus and Herod (trace their respective lineages sometime - *mind blown*).
Sometimes, yes, this DID involve picking up the sword and using actual violence. But the fight ended when Christ took up His cross. That was it. God won, evil lost.
And now it's just a question of: do you want to be with God forever, or do you prefer this silly fleeting mortal existence? There's no fights to be had, no violence necessary - Christianity already won. Any "inherent violence" you think comes in the name of Christianity is nothing more than a misplaced sense of importance on our earthly suffering instead of our Heavenly peace.
But america is growing up too, it just needs to hear the lesson extra loud.
Past tense. Modern America rejected it - after being founded on it - and now people are waking up to see just how bad of a mistake that was. The entire reason there's a religious revival in this nation is because so many of its people are clamoring for a sense of objective Truth and Goodness, of meaning based on said Truth and Goodness, for purpose in service of that Truth and Goodness - after a near century of being intentionally deprived and starved of it.
And they've found - painfully - that the promises of "State" and "society" simply don't fill that void. I swear, you never see this more starkly than in Feminism. Women can do everything according to the feminist doctrine - they can educate, they can postpone family, they can rise to the top, they can command top dollar, they can intimidate and subjugate everyone beneath them with their power. And yet, there's countless tales of how unsatisfying it is, as they take all that "success" and "empowerment" and then go home to a penthouse apartment with nothing more than a cat and a bottle of Chardonnay. There's a reason, Five, why so many feminists are absolutely miserable. And a reason so many of them lash out at society - aka becoming karens - as a result of that misery. It's usually a tale of misplaced blame, to be sure, but the very real misery behind it is devastating and crippling to them. So now they're looking for something REAL. And they're finding it in Christ. Because that's where it's found.
Shooting our friend Charlie was a big wake up call too. The most peaceful American you can possibly imagine, brutally murdered for what - talking. Challenging the lies and false promises of a secular/pagan America. And then his widow forgave his murderer! It forced generally peaceful people (maybe many who knew of Christ but had gone wayward), in the face of a generally hateful and violent opposition, to ask: what do they have, that I'm missing?
The answer is pretty simple, Five. And now they want that answer for themselves.
The lesson currently resides in the white house
See, that's such a atheist (and ngl protestant, sorry Charlie) "kingdom of man" way of thinking. God doesn't care who's in the White House. God doesn't even care that there is a White House. His will is that such a person accepts His grace and takes the gift of His wisdom to help those such a person is in a unique position to do, and Catholics will pray every day that he receives that grace and wisdom - but if you think God ordains heads of state, then you don't understand anything.
Im gonna cum on my girls nun costume tonight and gonna listen to her telling me about "jesus fucking christ" and "oh my god, fuck me"
Edgy. But lame.
Of course god doesn't care about any of these things. It made the world to see suffering. It likes it that way. Al Pacino in The Devils Advocate delivers the only viable explanation for gods internal state, if it exists. god, the ultimate authoritarian, wants blind obedience and will still punish you for aspects of your nature, that IT created you with.
No, we did that to ourselves. And, despite that, He kept on loving us. If anything, that's my favorite thing to take from His Word. Golly we must have been frustrating to Him at times.
Exodus: "I just freed you from bonda... what the heck are you people doing!?"
Leviticus: "OK, so I have some pretty simple rul.... EWW STOP DOING GROSS STUFF!!"
Deuteronomy: "Here's your kingdom just, please be obedi... OK you're already disobeying."
Joshua: "I will provide victory if you are strong and courageou... and you kept the loot from Jericho didn't you."
Judges: "You've been delivered by me and I'm really hap... what the heck are you worshipping!?"
Samuel: "I am King. Oh, you want a human king.... ok.... well here's Saul... well ok nevermind here's David... oh for crying out loud."
Kings: OK, I'm still here guys.... aaaand you're worshipping Baal. Sigh. OK, clearly we need some more time in the desert."
All the Books of the Prophets: "I haven't given up on you guys. You... don't care. HEY, JESUS, C'MERE SON."
I mean, if that's not the greatest illustration of love, hope, patience, kindness, and forgiveness - God is awesome man.
As an aside, can I point out the sheer absurdity of relying on a Hollywood fiction as a source over the literal word of God? Doesn't get much more "kingdom of man" than that, does it.
Youre really a creep, god would be proud. That free will thing isnt as convincing as you think it is, and reciting a bunch of random drug trip reports just makes you look more like a freak. And it doesnt matter if the source is a movie or philosophy, if you look at the things that happen in the world, an almighty god would have to intervene, fuck free will, free will is just an excuse god uses to blame the victim and keep suffering around.
But discourse and communication can't solve this problem, only demographic change can. Demgraphics are real. You have nothing but psychotic fiction.
Lol "dem graphics" are real, they made em so goooood in dat new release
if you look at the things that happen in the world, an almighty god would have to intervene
There it is. The most common and generic objection that the ignorant have to God. "Why do bad things happen to good people," essentially.
Well, for one, it assumes the notion of "good people." We're not. We're fallen, sinful creatures that wrecked this world - and continue to wreck it - because of our persistent inability to resist temptations and exercise self-control.
Pagan religions invert this and declare that falling prey to temptation and abdicating self-control are, in fact, virtues - as they (hilariously) simultaneously rationalize/bastardize God's eternal forgiveness as a escape hatch to life of sin. Or, worse, they deny God all together and declare themselves their own arbiters of Truth and Goodness.
And we've all seen how that works out over the course of human history, haven't we.
Do you know why God doesn't intervene? Seriously, it's a serious question that seeks your serious reply.
But ultimately, this oh-so-common and pedestrian objection is precisely what I was talking about in the first place. You, shaking with rage, waving your impotent fist at the sky, upset at the fact that you're not the arbiter of your own reality. It's ultimately fear and a sense of helplessness, but I can see how saying as much might seem condescending. So, instead, I'll point to the common sentiment among the godless that their ultimate gripe is: "God isn't fair."
But you're wrong. He is fair. You just don't like the reality of actual fairness.
Get over it.
That inherent assumption of guilt just because youre a person is what makes religion so cancerous. You illustrated that well. You can see how this is just right construct someone with authoritarian aspirations would use to gain control? Guilt a population into compliance? If you truly believe this stuff and aren't just spreading it because youre one of its beneficiaries, you have been tricked.
Again, demographics is not on your side. Anything real isn't. And thats a good thing.
Cast the first stone then, you who are free from sin.
You're so sure about it, throw that rock then brother.
I won't, dont worry. My lifes too good to ruin it with conflict.
And you know what, i dont hate you, we can be friends.
And when i say demographics i mean change over time, not civil conflict, sorry if thats how it could have been read.
They make nun costumes for eight year olds?
Irrelevant right wing comment floating in the void?
Your post oozes with the rigid, self-righteous narcissism that is very typical for god-suckers. Those non-individuals can seem nice, social and understanding until you realize that any and all moral behavior they exhibit stems from a rigid, internally cultivated, highly persistent delusion that enables them to do anything. Then there are edge cases like you, the dangerous variants, that derive rationalizations for violence from it and can potentially act as demagogues to spark violent impulses in other carriers of the disease.
god is a loser and a bitch and he can suck my fat one. god is a turd. Nothing smells worse than god. jesus was an idiot. Better americans are rejecting the godcunt.
Amen. Awomen. Aothers. Aprogress. Arightwingershavenowomen. Awomenaredoinggodswork.
Who hurt you?
Lol you wish, but fortunately i was not victimized by members of the god cult, other than by the detrimental impact they have on society.
What leads me to reject the disease is what humans call "compassion", but it is not possible to explain this to conservatives.
The level of rage you express doesn’t come no where. It goes far beyond anger, and I sincerely don’t know how you can live with it. Not being sarcastic here; as a human being you owe it to yourself to come to terms with it, beyond spewing anonymous vitriol in a comment section.
That rage you see is a projection, likely because you are an offended, seething god sucker, which is entertaining. My life is very good. Every night. Because i am not a constrained, religious dead end of evolution.
Because i am not a constrained, religious dead end of evolution.
LOL, no, just a genetic dead end.
Lol look at little low iq boy who thinks he said something witty 😀
Angry much? You sound a lot like a certain, now-banned reverend here.
How many times has your sock puppet paranoia lead you to the same conclusion today? And how many times did that same conclusion seem new to you? 😀
Lol you slow kids are entertaining
I kind of feel for being so mean, sorry guys.
If you felt sorry for being so mean, you wouldn’t have gone overboard in being mean. I think you revel in it, judging from you comments.
Im sorry i hurt your feelings, theres always porn though. I mean, if you know how to use a vpn in all those amazingly free red states.
Given your last comment, I rest my case. You do revel in it.
Lol look at little low iq boy who thinks he said something witty.
You're an expert on little low iq boys because you see them all the time. It's called a mirror.
You might want to take a look at who is actually reproducing in our society before you spout off about "evolutionary dead end". I'm not religious and you could probably fairly call me an atheist, but it's pretty easy to see that irreligion has not led to greater success in reproduction, which is all that matters in evolution.
There are hot spots of messed up, dysfunctional, semi-incestuous reproduction in religious flyover states; sucessful attempts, those that feature quality over quantity, dont happen there though. Ten right wingers on their way out aren't smarter or more successful than a single one.
For evolution, the only success that matters is creating the next generation. You can be as smart and self-satisfied as you want, but if you don't reproduce enough to sustain a population, you are the dead end (and I say this as someone who is smart and successful and has not reproduced).
Yeah, it really doesnt matter that much, but it typically triggers right wingers because theyre all about family and blah, but in reality they dont know the first thing about emotional connection. They replace all of that with rules, shoulds, bible, drivel, blah.
LOL, goddamn, son, there's been more projection in your posts in this comment section than a 24-screen movie theater.
I think we can all agree that you’re broken, malignant. Amd should be put down.
Will you need a ride to the vet?
I dont "need rides" im not a dysfunctional, underresourced right wing loser that depends on others because they dont have it together.
im not a dysfunctional, underresourced right wing loser
LOL, well, one out of 4 is still 25%.
Blaming Him is easier than seeing your own flaws and failures (let alone repenting for them), isn't it.
It's nothing new, a very common tale. But, it's been asked and answered. We're going to jump to Luke real quick.
"He saved others, let him save himself if he is the chosen one, the Messiah of God."
That's basically what you said in the above post, albeit with more vulgarity. It's the same mockery, it's the same scorn, it's the same derision, it's the same hate - and all of that is simply the end stage of the sin of pride.
But here's the thing, Five. You can still come back from it.
You are the reviling criminal on one side of Christ dying on the cross, spitting invective and rebuking him to your dying breath. But you don't have to be. You CAN be the other one replying, "Are you not subject to the same condemnation? Remember me Jesus, when you come into your kingdom."
And He will. Even after a lifetime of sin, even in the end stages of pride - you can still come back from that. You just have to want to. Genuinely. Repenting and sincere. And I hope you do one day. Might not be this day, but hopefully one day in the future, even if only your last one.
You can do it man. I hope that you do.
"You can do it man. I hope that you do."
Condescending pseudo-compassion, an important tool in the repertoire of right wing things, is very easy to see if you have actual empathy. We can see you.
I don't want you to see me. I want you to see Him.
Lol, gross
*eyeroll*
Yeah, youre charismatic, thats dangerous with a mind virus like that.
Charisma is a dump stat.
I'm right. And that's what has you so upset.
Im glad to see youre finally getting upset (indicated by you projecting upset on me, im actually between curious and mildly amused). Its always good to see a right wing ego crumble a bit.
Why would I be upset? If anything, I'm delighted to reflect on the word of God and to share it with others - even if they resent it - in hopes of bring greater understanding of its Truth, Love, Goodness, Justice, and Beauty.
That is time well spent, my friend. Any opportunity to go into my Bible, reread the Word of God, spend time in contemplation, and share it with others is time I appreciate. Thank you.
I might not have spent that time this morning if not for your desire to discuss the subject. Thank you.
False gratitude and slightly covert, narcissistic self-rewards for spreading the oh so important word. Typical christian.
Take the compliment, Five.
Okay, sorry i was being mean
I just read this all, and I have to say you are doing a great job exposing the deeply abusive nature of christian indoctrination. The way you are weaponizing the paragraphs of a random collection of drug trip reports (aka bible) to tell me im the criminal (because i hurt your little religionist feelings) is excellent and god would likely be very entertained if it existed.
The sad part is that you will do this to dependents as well. But hence the part about women doing gods work by not selecting creeps like you anymore.
That's just you being defensive. I get it though. Repentance isn't easy, especially when you think you're your own god.
Nah, being human is enough, its just you narcissists can't process that kind of thinking.
Mm, maybe enough for you. But if that's the case, then why do you have such a problem with people who seek the Kingdom of God rather than settling merely for the kingdom of man?
Cuz seeking a kingdom that doesnt exist keeps society from thriving as it consumes resources that could be used more productively.
Ahh, and now we get to the Marxism. By all means, tell me all about the "more productive consumption of resources" that will encourage "society to thrive" which matters so much to the kingdom of man.
Self-interest does dysfunctional things when confused by a mind virus such as religion. Need no controlled economy, just free individuals driven by mental illness (like religion). It prolongs suffering for everyone. Demographics will fix this though.
You keep saying that, but you've illustrated no evidence of what you mean by it. Obviously there are some religions you like. Pagan ones, but religions all the same.
Let me ask you this: define, in your own words, the ideal demographic. Across all spectrums. Race, ethnicity, religion, alienage, sex/gender, heck get down to food and dress preferences if you like.
Ideal demographic in your book: go.
One that has enough of a brain to not seek kingdoms of air.
You didn't answer the question.
What's your ideal demographic? Race, ethnicity, religion, alienage, sex/gender, heck get down to food and dress preferences if you like. Who should be included, and who should not?
Hard to define. At the core i just want people to be more compassionate i think. That demographic replacement stuff is not helpful. Im doing what i think conservatives are doing because they feel in power right now. Thats not good.
I think religion isnt real and enables many otherwise monstrous individuals to function morally in effect. I believe humans are good by nature though, (not bad like christians like to believe, misanthropically) and religion is a tool thats not needed in a secular society. It is a compensatory framework to establish ethical discipline in an unhealthy society. But a healthy society wouldnt need religion. so a less religious demographic would be ideal. Well, so i thought. But now im thinking, without it, many americans wouldnt have anything to constrain them, because they never learned morals, all they ever learned was religion and the peer pressure it uses to keep them in check. They have no inner light, they need the outer light, however illusory.
Im considering myself lucky now, thank you.
I'm going to fisk this, because it needs fisking.
Hard to define.
Why? You seem to have an idea of what you want. Why not articulate it? "Demographics will fix this though."
What Demographics in particular will "fix this?"
I think religion isnt real
So I take it you're as vulgar with Islamists and Hindus and the LGBT and the DEI crowd, and the environmentalists too - at least as much as you have been with the Christians, correct?
Or are those... acceptable demographics, in your book?
I believe humans are good by nature though
Why? They constantly prove otherwise.
and religion is a tool thats not needed in a secular society.
Name one secular society that exists on planet Earth.
It is a compensatory framework to establish ethical discipline in an unhealthy society. But a healthy society wouldnt need religion.
Why would a society of humans "good by nature" be an unhealthy one? (You're so close, given the way you concluded your reply.)
They have no inner light, they need the outer light, however illusory.
What's an "inner light?"
You know they don't know language or mathematics either, until someone teaches them. Just saying.
Unfortunately, good people are typically easy to manipulate because they believe in the fundamental good in others. People like the president like to exploit that, and also like to exploit frustration. We dont need religion, we need ratio. I would rather be governed by an AI than a christian or a conservative.
Yeah, i would offend anybody, not just conservatives. I just offend them primarily because their egos have gone out of control lately. They think they won for good and now they show everyone how deeply authoritarian they are.
A healthy society doesnt exist. But tons are healthier than the us. That christian stuff aint healthy.
Unfortunately, good people are typically easy to manipulate because they believe in the fundamental good in others.
Yes, like children. It's why predators prey on them.
It's a naivete. But, I don't think you're a child, Five - so you should know better by this point.
I would rather be governed by an AI than a christian or a conservative.
All hail the machine god?
See, the funny thing is that Christianity is the only religion that DOESN'T seek to govern you. Because it doesn't care about government - He cares about YOU. YOU PERSONALLY. Christianity seeks to guide you, He warns you of consequences, He offers you help every step of the way - but I defy you to find even one line of Scripture that has Christianity trying to ensconce itself in government and "govern" you.
You won't find one. And the Founders knew that. It's why they knew they could create a Christian Nation - and, make no mistake, this IS a Christian Nation - but still segregate Church and State.
Yeah, i would offend anybody, not just conservatives. I just offend them primarily because their egos have gone out of control lately.
So offend them. You really think that the LGBT Pedo egos aren't out of control? The anti-racist racist DEI race baiters? The illegals? The feminists? The environmentalists? The Marxists? The progressives? The liberal left-leaning enablers of all the above? Can they handle being offended?
Yet, we tap dance around their sensitivities, don't we. For some reason we're afraid of offending them, aren't we. Why? Is it because they're right? No, obviously not - the things they believe are demonstratively provable nonsense. And when they're criticized, even slightly, they go bananas. Christians don't do that (even when, arguably, they should - see Nigeria). Is that something you're taking advantage of?
And if so is that because, pardon the pun, those sacred cows aren't as... tolerant of ridicule as Christians are?
And if so, where does that put Christians on the demographic spectrum of welcome members of society that you find so difficult to define?
They think they won for good and now they show everyone how deeply authoritarian they are.
Mm, you're conflating Christianity and Conservatism. Don't do that please.
Religion - at least, Christianity - exists completely outside of politics. God doesn't care about politics even slightly.
A healthy society doesnt exist. But tons are healthier than the us.
OK, so I was going to originally reply, "Name one." (And I defy you to try all the same.) But then I reread it: "a healthy society doesn't exist."
Why not? Aren't humans good by nature? Why, then, are their no "healthy societies" if the default of humanity is "good" instead of "sinful and fallen?"
That christian stuff aint healthy.
What, specifically, is unhealthy about it?
I appreciate you AT, this is getting to the point where i have to put effort into my responses, so i will catch you here or in another thread when i have time to do that.
The effort is appreciated.
they cause significant harm, e.g. creationism or jihad
Huh? Can you perhaps lay out the harm that a belief in creationism has caused, and how it compares to jihad?
Religion would need to replace the rainbow cult, the death cult, and there would need to be a cure for TDS beforehand.
It’s looking more and more like injections of lead delivered at very high velocities will be the necessary cure for TDS.
The nation is tracking about 3 years prior to Sumter.
But remember that Bloody Kansas had already happened at that point. Sumter wasn't really the clear starting point.
1. If there is no god, there is no objective morals.
2. Mlk day should be gotten rid of. Why is a rapeist celebrated as a dieity? (granted islamist do this daily)
3. Quoting Slade? Do better. She's the equivalent of the hobo on the corner rambling about interdimentional beings.
Atheist telling religions what they need is exactly what religions don't need.
Liberalism does not exist without Judeo-Christianity. Period. End of story. There is no objective argument that all are equal WITHOUT God, the creator, being responsible for them.
There is a way to get there through rationality and ethical reasoning, but right wing non-persons don't have any internal ethical compass, so they have to cling to religion to derive an external substitute from it. Without that, right wing brain cripples wouldn't be able to have a society as their most defining characteristic (unconditional greed) would be in the way. Their decline is therefore very healing to the rest of us who are more advanced and able to have concern for others, not only ourselves.
lol at you lecturing on rationality, ethics, or classical liberalism.
Better to listen to the mostly peaceful people who shove others in front of subway trains
Rightism is incompatible with ethics and attractive young women reject defeated, inviable right wing specimens. It doesn't matter who speaks this objective truth, it can be me or a right wing wife that cheats on her stinking, lame, impotent husband with a sense of deep pleasure and great relief, for hours, while happily forgetting about the stale loser, just being in the moment witha better someone, who can deliver natures great blessings, free and unconstrained by highly unattractive religionism.
Try harder to convince us you’ve been with a woman, it just isn’t landing
Lol i know its inconceivable to right wing micropenises, but women do exist, they are just not interested in you guys.
Im sorry youre on the wrong side of history, but not everyone who claims to have a girl is lying. They do exist. Just not for you.
Your anger is quite something else. Have you tried not projecting your failures and shortcomings onto others?
Your eloquence is quite something else. Have you tried mental frameworks other than sock puppet paranoia and right wing drivel? It may improve your prognosis.
Have you tried not being so fucking angry and getting some help for it? I highly recommend anger management classes. At least before you go do something very rash.
Fortunately, I am blessed with actual ethics and not in need of external regulations such as religion or classes. I think thats why im attractive, as opposed to right wingers, who are just angry and frustrated all the time, which repulses everyone else, especially women.
I mean, your anger and frustration are understandable, because nature has decided that you are a bad answer to lifes problems, and you will therefore be discontinued. But please keep those bad vibes in the woods you inhabit, we dont need you in civilized areas, please, thank you, bye
I have a better solution for him.
https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/health-services-benefits/medical-assistance-dying.html
And it’s even socialist! Just the way he likes it.
Lol
You make a mistake there. I’ve no anger towards you; just pity for your condition. For you, this seems to be something big. For me, it’s just a boring Friday.
The religious revival I see is one that primarily espouses Christian Nationalism, which is merely the illiberal flipside of progressivism.
You don’t see anything
Just because you're blind doesn't mean I am
You sure you’re just not seeing things in your drunkenness?
Hdhevekakkfjxnrbfjf fjdbrjgjf cjdkrj. Im sorry. Youre a kcndnsmjcndnekfn. Thank you for reading this.
You get that America is a Christian Nation, right?
I don't know what you mean by "Christian Nation". Please define
Even an atheist like me can see that the entire moral foundation of Western civilization and culture is Christian. Maybe we can keep that without the formal religion, but I'm less and less sure of that as time goes on.
What are the moral foundations of Western civilization that are specifically Christian?
A number of Christian morals - it's right to own other human beings, for example - have been abandoned.
Wait, why do you think a "right to own other human beings" was ever a Christian moral? Do you even know what you're talking about???
All the way back to extremely pre-Christian Exodus - which, spoiler alert, was about how pissed God was at slavery - the Bible is replete with condemnation of slavery and very explicit about the rights of slaves. This was anathema to the pagan societies at the time.
And then when Christ appeared, it became even MORE explicit. He drew an undeniable line in the sand: there is NO moral legitimacy to slavery. None.
So.... what the heck are you even talking about.
Have you ever studied this subject, or are you just repeating what someone told you about it?
My dude, you're extremely ignorant of the Christian Bible. Why was it Christian to own slaves? Maybe because Christians did it for nearly 2 thousand years, citing the Bible as justification?
God was pissed at slavery? Bible is replete with condemnations? Am I being trolled?
Lev 25:44-46 - As for the male and female slaves whom you may have, it is from the nations around you that you may acquire male and female slaves. You may also acquire them from among the aliens residing with you and from their families who are with you who have been born in your land; they may be your property. You may keep them as a possession for your children after you, for them to inherit as property. These you may treat as slaves, but as for your fellow Israelites, no one shall rule over the other with harshness.
The above is just one of many verses condoning slavery.
There is not one verse in the Bible that outlaws, condemns, or prohibits slavery. Not one. Feel free to prove me wrong.
I've studied this topic extensively. It's clear you have not.
Am I being trolled?
No, you're just fooling yourself. Telling yourself what you want to hear for the sake of thinking you make sense.
The above is just one of many verses condoning slavery.
It's not condoning it. You read the verse, but you didn't bother to actually understand it. Look at its title. "Redemption of Property." Look at its preceding title "The Jubilee Year."
Seriously, I want you to go back and read Leviticus 25:10. And tell me how that is pro-slavery.
Nobody owns another human being. They ALL belong to God.
Never once in Scripture has God tolerated humans treated as chattel. It was never presented as a moral allowance, let alone a moral ideal. The anti-slavery proscriptions of the Bible were the most controversial things of that age, because it described slaves as equal (if not greater, Christ had some specific words about that!) under God and provided instruction how to deal with the realities of bondservice and debt-stewards.
Slavery is a dehumanization of human beings. At no point - NOT ONCE - in Scripture, does God EVER dehumanize the slave.
And you'd know that if you'd actually READ the Bible, instead of just copy/pasting pagan talking points and calling it "study."
It's not condoning it. You read the verse, but you didn't bother to actually understand it. Look at its title. "Redemption of Property." Look at its preceding title "The Jubilee Year."
LMAO - you dolt! The Jubilee Year is referring to Israelites! The verses I cited refer to non-Israelites, e.g., the "nations around you" and the "aliens residing with you and from their families who are with you who have been born in your land"
Nobody owns another human being. They ALL belong to God.
Really? Then why does Lev 25:45-46 specifically refer to the slaves as PROPERTY? The verses are absolutely about chattel slavery. "You may bequeath them to your sons after you, to inherit as a possession FOREVER."
Exodus 21:1-11 are perhaps more abhorrent. It describes how to treat Israelite daughters sold as slaves, and makes clear that the children and wives of male Hebrew slaves are property of the master. "When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do."..."If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master’s, and he shall go out alone."
You still haven't produced a single scripture that outlaws, condemns, or prohibits slavery. Why not?
Again: Slavery is a dehumanization of human beings. At no point - NOT ONCE - in Scripture, does God EVER dehumanize the slave.
It's odd how you cherry-pick and remove the context from your verses, but ignore that which precedes them. You mention Leviticus 25:45, but ignore the ten verses that come before it. You bring up Exodus 21 (a favorite among the godless), but you make no effort whatsoever to understand it. The whole point (and you should really read it to the end) is about turning lemons into lemonade; about taking a fallen world and making it as moral and godly as possible.
Compare it to the prevailing laws at the time: the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi or the Laws of Egypt. Those codes protected slave owners. Mosiac Law, on the other hand, turned that on its head and made the servants the more important consideration. Indeed, the very verses you ignorantly cite tell us precisely that: they offer mercy and hope to the destitute, and promise to the daughters betrothed. This was unheard of in ancient society. It was the most compassionate and humanizing thing the ancient world had ever seen.
But you refuse to see that, because all you want to see are slaves. With your modern definition of the term, and all its connotations of whips and chains, applied to them. It's disingenuous, and it reveals the axe you're grinding.
Then why does Lev 25:45-46 specifically refer to the slaves as PROPERTY? The verses are absolutely about chattel slavery.
Read it again. These were not slaves of conquest, kidnap, or oppression. These were what we would in modern parlance call "bankrupt." Economically. Coming to the Israelites hat-in-hand. They were destitute and had nothing but what they could provide in work. So God instructed His flawed and fallen people to take them up and bring them into household estate. And not just that, but to treat them fairly and condemn their mistreatment.
It was less whipped dog toiling in the field, and more butler in service and sharing in livelihood - with far more rights and protections and affording than anything you'd find in Egypt or Babylon.
I would encourage you to go reread the Pentateuch again, in full. Don't just go looking for "Gotcha!" lines - read it as a whole. God's Covenant with man, as He pieced back together the shattered vase that humanity destroyed by their sin.
And then, since you're there anyway, go read the four Gospels and see how it led to a fulfilled promise of a New Covenant - one that shatters any notion you might try and argue advocates "the right to own other human beings" being in any way a "Christian moral."
It is not, christians just hijack it, claim to be the source. Religion is an ethical crutch, used by unhealthy societies to keep their mentally ill populations in check and use peer pressure for control, which benefits actual patriarchs. Healthy societies dont need religion to emulate morals.
Well, for most of the past 2000 years it's been Christian. So when did this hijacking happen? If you want to say it started with Greek and Roman civilization and philosophy, that's fair. But Christianity emerged from that era and transformed a lot of the values of the older civilizations that we would find a bit questionable, to say the least.
It's also the only cultural value to emerge from the Dark Ages.
Eliminating Marxists will help.
Yeah, communism doesnt bring food to the table.
Eliminating those that confuse marxism with social democracy would raise the iq of a society though.
A nation of Christians, who seek to self-govern themselves in the image of God who is Truth, Justice, Goodness, and Beauty.
The Senate of the Founder's generation disagreed with AT:
The most direct statement on this topic comes from the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli, ratified unanimously by the U.S. Senate and signed by President John Adams. Article 11 of the treaty states:
> "The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
*rubs temples*
Dude, did you even read it? Stating to a bunch of Muslim pirates that America wasn't a theocratic state hostile to Islam is not the same as denying the Christian beliefs and morality that was inherent to the founding principles and people.
FFS. You bluesky programmed NPCs are insufferable sometimes.
Does the Christian Nationalism you see support or oppose Israel, Judaism, and/or Zionism? Yes or no?
Because I see a lot of retarded nihilists, atheists, and progressives who are highly motivated to foist their religion on the internet and around the world against any sort of enlightenment, Jewish, Christian, Catholics, Orthodox, Buddhist, Indigenous Peoples', Sikhs, Muslims (but only certain kinds), or other.
The kind of people whose intellectual depth rather self-evidently and obliviously points to a "And then, for no particular reason at all, the German people decided to elect Adolph Hitler" interpretation of facts, history, and interpersonal relationships.
Not sure if you were replying to me. I don't understand what Christian Nationalist support/opposition to Israel, Judaism, and/or Zionism has to do with anything.
I can't speak to nihilists or progressives, but I'm curious what atheist "religion" you feel is being foisted on the internet and around the world. I do, however, see many religious theists seeking to compel belief, or at least adherence, to their theologies across history.
I can't speak to nihilists or progressives, but I'm curious what atheist "religion" you feel is being foisted on the internet and around the world.
Right, because no explicitly atheistic or even secular movement has ever tried to impose its own particular political theology on society at any time in human history.
There are ideologies that incorporate atheism, but they're not based on atheism. What is the "political theology" you're referring to?
There are ideologies that incorporate atheism, but they're not based on atheism
LOL, if they incorporate atheism, they're based on atheism, you fork-tongued stooge.
Very well. Explain to me how Marxism-Leninism is based on atheism. That is, how the tenets of Marxism-Leninism necessarily flow from atheism.
You're not going to identify the "political theology" you referred to?
Funny, I never said, Marxism-Leninism. But thanks for identifying your political theology, the one that's based on the idea that religion is the "opiate of the masses" and couches its anti-clericalism with the communist utopia as an end state, but supposedly isn't based on atheism.
Funny, I said there are ideologies that incorporate atheism, but they're not based on atheism. You even quoted it in your reply, which said, "LOL, if they incorporate atheism, they're based on atheism."
So I wanted to know how the Marxist-Leninist ideology, which incorporates atheism, is based on atheism.
Please educate yourself on what Marx meant by religion as the "opiate of the people". It's not what you think it means.
For the record, I've been a libertarian probably longer than you've been alive. I've also studied socialism.
So I wanted to know how the Marxist-Leninist ideology, which incorporates atheism, is based on atheism.
So something that incorporates something, and makes it a cornerstone of that same ideology, isn't based on something, particularly when it goes out of its way to denigrate the ideology's target through its fake-ass "oppressed/oppressor" construct and the "false consciousness" circular reasoning?
Marx and Lenin were both quite clear that they viewed religion as an obstacle to their communist utopia. Inferring that their ideology wasn't based on this hostility to religion in general doesn't even pass the laugh test.
Please educate yourself on what Marx meant by religion as the "opiate of the people". It's not what you think it means.
Yeah, it is. The same old "false consciousness" nonsense that keeps getting recycled in various forms by subsequent generations of marxists. They all hate religion because they can't stand the competition.
For the record, I've been a libertarian probably longer than you've been alive. I've also studied socialism.
For the record, that's just a deflection.
I really enjoyed this article JD. I am also an atheist who inhabits a religious family. I still consider myself "spiritual". You might find the biblical lectures of Jordan Peterson interesting. His secular dissection through a philosophical and psychological lens, has furthered my ethical development while maintaining my atheism.
I was happy to hear that frail jordan has fallen ill again. I wish great pain and demise on right wingers. ck was not a loss, will not be missed or remembered. And god is truly a clown, only his suckers are bigger clowns. jesus and god is who I hear about when i put my cum deep inside my girl. Like hard. Like, holy fucking god, that pussy can take it, jeeeeesus fucking christ, jizzes christ fuck, holy fucking shit
You must be fun at parties.
I actually am. Very charming. You would probably be positively terified if you met me in person. Or very angry.
Is that with or without a large knife in your hand?
God, damn, you are a terrible person.
LOL yeah sometimes, sorry if i hurt your feelings zeb, but that was collateral damage, i dont think youre terrible
It's not hurt feelings, it's disgust that anyone can be so nasty. Neither Peterson nor Kirk were hurting anyone. They were just talking. You don't have to agree, but a little basic human compassion is nice.
That’s anathema to democratkind.
I don't know what the Grey Box said, but thank you for confirming my decision. Some people are genuinely not worth hearing from.
Yeah, it's a nasty piece of work. You want to argue about the value of religion, great. Just don't celebrate the misery and pain of others who are just trying to argue what they think is right.
Very good and thoughtful article JD, and helpful as far as the role of religion as a cultural pillar. But I am happy for your son who “then found further meaning in a theology that connected him with a Creator.”
That grace is the whole point, from which every other benefit flows.
Best and smartest thing you’ve ever said.
Probably the 20th time someone thought this was a witty response to a removed comment.
Yet completely true.
I’m so glad you’re so impressed.
Good article J.D., thank you.
As for the proselytizers in the comments, trying to sell to atheists is an odd quest, we aren't in the market. Chasing satanists would be more productive, they still have faith.
I think JD has been one of the most reliable reads here in recent months. Pretty grounded, reasonable takes, and unlike some of his cohorts, I don't feel like I need to go do homework to figure out if he's lying or not. Sadly refreshing.
As to your other comment, I share your general lack of interest in people proselytizing to me, but that's a two-way street. Mormon missionaries ain't got nothing on atheists when it comes to trying to sell a faith-based belief system to strangers.
Whether it's new windows or a new faith, I'll seek out information on my own, thank you. No soliciting.
Unlike some atheists—we've all met them—I don't belittle people who embrace religion.
FWIW, this is not atheism as I understand it. I call it areligious.
Atheists say there are no gods.
Agnostics wonder if there are gods.
Religious people believe there are gods.
Areligious people don't care if there are gods.
What about people who conclude, based on available evidence and their own experience that the idea of gods makes no sense and doesn't fit with how the world works? I suppose you can call them agnostic, but I don't think "atheist" is a bad fit either. Though I can't blame people for avoiding that label as so many atheists are obnoxious assholes.
They are atheists. They claim there are no gods. It's the militant atheists who preach and annoy everybody.
Areligious means just not giving a fuck. Investigating it means giving a fuck.
Everyone has a “religion”. I think it’s in our nature to seek meaning and purpose beyond being born, living whatever life fate or chance often seems to deal to us, and dying. Question is just what is your particular chosen religion doing for you? Not proselytizing here, but posing the question we should all ask ourselves.
The article and my comment are about god-religions. Not climate catastrophe. Not Obama or Trump. Not Marx or Mises.
FWIW, this is not atheism as I understand it. I call it areligious.
Slight disagreement. The fact that JD is participating in or supporting his son's participation in a Simchat Torah and other synagogue activities puts him in the religious-but-agnostic category.
Edit: per "Areligious means just not giving a fuck.", carrying a sidearm, wearing a plate carrier to defend your wife and son's Church/Synagogue is not "not giving a fuck". Agnostics may wonder whether God(s) exist(s) or they may accept the answer as they don't (or can't) know (which most major religions acknowledge or accommodate).
Oh bullshit. An armed guard at a nightclub doesn't have to give a fuck about clubbing to work there. A Brinks driver doesn't have to know squat about antiques to drive them around.
Religious people have actively supported almost every barbaric violation of human rights and bigotry for the last many thousands of years. It has been atheists and the less religious who have pushed for human rights and equal protection under the law. I don't care how religious people are, but don't pretend that religion is a force for good in society. Look right now, it is the very religious who are supporting America's decent into fascism.
Uh huh. Atheist enlightenment has been great throughout the last hundred or so years.
Notable enlightened atheists mclude:
Stalin
Mao
Pol Pot
The Kim Dynasty of NK
Need I go on?
Religious people have actively supported almost every barbaric violation of human rights and bigotry for the last many thousands of years.
Name one.
Crusades, Inquisition, genocide of the Native American population, the Holocaust, US Slavery, US Jim Crow.
The Crusades were in response to a request for aid against Arab Muslims by the Eastern Roman Emperor.
The Roman Inquisition really wasn’t into torture. They were an investigative body. The Spanish Inquisition was not sanctioned by the Pope and was run as a part of the Spanish crown.
The death (not genocide) of the Amerindian population was due to diseases that Eurasians had developed a tolerance or immunity to, but they had not. It would’ve happened regardless of the religion of those who came over in the 16th century.
The Holocaust was perpetrated by a paganesque cult we call the Nazis. Believe it or not, they also persecuted Christian (Catholic and Protestant) leaders who opposed them. Not once did they use Christianity as a justification.
Slavery has existed since early civilizations. What’s interesting is that only the Christian West and Orthodoxy decided that it was a bad institution and chose to end it. This actually happened twice in the West, once in the Middle Ages, and again in the modern era, after 1800. And ending it was pushed by Christian religious figures using Christianity as a justification for ending it.
Again, Jim Crow was not justified by Christianity. Instead, it was Christian religious leaders who demanded it be ended, using Christianity as the justification.
https://c.tenor.com/a2-YmtTJebsAAAAd/tenor.gif
Everything in that comment is a lie.
The Crusaders were violent mobs and the entire reason for them had disappeared before the reached Jerusalem. They still massacred every Jew and Muslim they could find. Before them they had engaged in pogroms against Jews in Germany. Second and Third Crusade leaders tried to prevent such but with only partial success. The Fourth Crusade chose instead to sack Constantinople.
The "Investigations" of the Inquisition were run by the Church and always involved torture. Heretics were burned at the stake. Protestants did burnings too but preferred hangings and beheadings.
There was indeed death from disease in the indigenous populations of the Americas but some of that was deliberate. And the genocidal "Indian Removal" was not about disease.
The Nazi ideology was not Christian but the Nazis were supported by a LOT of Christians including most ot the Catholic hierarchy in France and Croatia and most Protestants in Germany. Pope Pius XI made concordats with Hitler and Mussolini.
Christian Europe in the Middle Ages didn't have formal slavery but it had the feudal system which wasn't much different. The last vestiges of feudalism lasted in New York until the 1840s and in Quebec in the 1850s.
Christians in the US South overwhelmingly supported slavery. The Southern Baptist, Southern Methodist, and Southern Presbyterian Churches were CREATED to support slavery. Woodrow Wilson's father was the leading Southern Presbyterian leader of the late 19th century. White Southern Protestants remained huge Jim Crow supporters through the 1960s. One such example was Jerry Falwell.
No, your statements are utter bullshit. AT had it right. All you do is puke out leftist revisions is,, AKA lies.
You need help.
https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/health-services-benefits/medical-assistance-dying.html
You neglected to mention the transatlantic slave trade and genocides of indigenous peoples in Africa.
You also neglected the massive depopulation of parts of Europe in religious wars in Early Modern Europe. Even Stalin and Mao were unable to create such a large depopulation.
Nope. You’re utterly full of shit. It will be good when you and your fellow travelers are removed from civilization.
Religious people have actively supported almost every barbaric violation of human rights and bigotry for the last many thousands of years.
Religious people supported the French Revolution, the Leninist takeover of Russia, Mao's China, the Weather Underground, and the Khmer Rouge?
Tony and Charlie are fanatical Marxist liars.
A spiritual revival is certainly the only hope for the debased Urban Black subculture.
"As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion, – as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims], – and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries." -- John Adams, Treaty of Tripoli
https://www.au.org/the-latest/church-and-state/articles/a-word-from-john-adams-a-224-year-old-treaty/
The government is not the nation.
Also, we need to bring back "Musselmen".
Wait, you're citing the same guy who also said, “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other"?
What's particularly interesting is how all the people in this thread spazzing out about the content of the article have apparently homed in on Christianity, when Tuccille mentions it in the context of his wife's Judaism. Nor are the self-styled atheists commenting on this exercising any kind of particular self-awareness as to why there's been such a sharp uptick in religious devotion over the last year, following a generation of its decline in American life.
Adams was a heretic.
For me, the reinvigoration of time-tested belief systems compatible with a free society beats the adoption of newer and explicitly illiberal religion substitutes.
The problem is, the most prominent religious belief system that is being "reinvigorated" is evangelical Christianity, which is generally aligned with Trump's attempts to impose an authoritarian regime. Meanwhile, alternative world views, like those often termed "spiritual but not religious", are much more aligned with and supportive of liberal democracy.
Your side does love its false dichotomies, just like you claim anyone who doesn't adhere to your retarded political theology is a "fascist."
"...The problem is, the most prominent religious belief system that is being "reinvigorated" is evangelical Christianity, which is generally aligned with Trump's attempts to impose an authoritarian regime..."
"The problem is I'm a TDS-addled slimy pile of lying shit"
We got it, asswipe. Fuck off and die.
ICE is deporting lots of evangelical Christians.
...
Well, OK, but how does that help? It's like discovering that the same people hate you whether or not you wear a certain fragrance. But unless you like that perfume yourself, why torture yourself with it?
Religion and all these other -isms are very ornate ways of confirming their own assertions.
^+1. And fantasies.
Anyone else?
No, superstitions will not help anything at all.
The concept of a god is a human invention, nothing other than that and we can argue about the motives, those are irrelevant.
No, there was no Jesus. Never was, except for the guy nailing on the shingles down the street.
Suggest you learn to live without your superstitions, it's better to deal with reality.
"A Religious Revival Could Help Reinvigorate the Liberal West"
Have no reason to assume this is yet one more 'bleiver' hoping that their 'bleiving' in some fantasy might sucker others into such bullshit.
OK, let's be clear:
There is absolutely no evidence of a 'god'. None, not one bit.
To those who prefer 'Christianity' as a fantasy, there is zero evidence that a "Jesus" ever existed. Period.
'connected him with a Creator that, according to the Declaration of Independence, endowed us with "certain unalienable Rights….Among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."'
The person who wrote those words wasn't Christian.