Gallup: Drop in U.S. Religiosity Among Largest in World

[Hans Blaster]

Public events, public employment, that sort of thing.

We've already discussed public employment, so in what way are you Christians oppressed in the public square vis-a-vis public events?

There are appropriate conversation topics, sure. But personal disclosure isn't something that should be off limits, provided it doesn't completely derail the lesson. That religion is somehow treated as a third rail is exactly part of the problem, because open polite discussion of such matters seems necessary for a pluralistic society to develop consideration for diversity of belief. Requiring it to be a secretive endeavor in no way seems reasonable to me.

I'm sure there are some aspects, like those of the sort discussed in comparative religion classes or basic questions about practices. It gets difficult if start getting near theology. Many believers have difficulty separating descriptions of the sort from preaching which would not be appropriate.

Ah, I misunderstood. What benefit is such a form supposed to produce that isn't already covered by current oversite practices?

Public disclosure, and in some cases, disclosure to their own parishioners. (There is no public oversight of churches.)

 

[Larniavc]

Sounds like you're telling Christians how to live their lives. Normative ethics is a part of public life, so why should Christians sit silently while baseless "moral"s run rampant instead of holding firm to the normativity of their ethical principles?

Because a person’s right to flail their arms ends when that hit’s another in the face.

 

[Larniavc]

Sounds like you're telling Christians how to live their lives.

No I’m telling the not to intrude on mine.

 

[Ellesmere]

"A report in The Lancet estimates that deep funding cuts to USAID could lead to more than 14 million additional deaths by 2030, with one-third being children, if the funding isn't restored. The cuts have already caused the immediate shutdown of essential programs, leading to a higher risk of diseases like cholera and a rise in under-five mortality rates in affected areas. As a result, some models already estimate that the dismantling of USAID has already caused 600,000 deaths, with two-thirds being children."

******************************************************************************************

1) What would motivate America's Evangelicals to align themselves with a President who terminated USAID, a government agency, according to independent sources, is credited with saving 91 million lives over the last 2 decades and whose demise will come at a price of 14 million by 2030?

PROVERBS !4
31) Whoever oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God"

2) USAID operated at a cost to the average US taxpayer $0.18 per day - President Trump, a multi-billionaire, and his chief advisor Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, were instrumental in its demise - depriving the world's most destitute of food and basic medical care!

MATTHEW 19
23) Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven.
24) Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

3) What portions of Scripture can MAGA Evangelicals cite that would justify their political alliance with a President whose 40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ have denied 23 million of the world's neediest children access to an education that would dramatically improve their prospects on life?

4) What version of their Christian faith would rationalize the withdrawal of government programs that would result in depriving another 100 million of the world's most vulnerable of basic healthcare, - leading to more than 3 million preventable deaths per year with a disproportionate number of those children!

MATTHEW 25
40) .....‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me"

5) Presumably Evangelical support of Donald Trump is to exert their influence on the White House, the Trump Administration and congressional Republicans now in the majority in both the House and the Senate - presumably that influence could have extended to convince the President that the price of their support included retaining the humanitarian branch of the federal government - USAID!

PROVERBS 31
8) Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves,
for the rights of all who are destitute.
9) Speak up and judge fairly;
defend the rights of the poor and needy.

6) Those who don't identify with the Christian faith would be well justified in questioning as to why they should convert to a religion where some of its most vocal advocates, the Evangelicals, support a President whose actions appears preoccupied with the construction of a garish $300 million gold ballroom designed to impress the rich and powerful - not preserving human life of the world's less fortunate!

https://www.npr.org/sections/goats-and-soda/2025/07/01/nx-s1-5452513/trump-usaid-foreign-aid-deaths

What USAID did, and the effects of Trump's cuts on lifesaving aid

Oxfam outlines what the U.S. Agency for International Development did and the real-life effects of USAID cuts.

www.oxfamamerica.org

 

[Fervent]

Hmm.. I've never thought of that; Interesting.
I would not say that's hte case in my class personally. I teach a behaviour class so having a good connection with individual students makes a HUUUUUGE difference.
When you hear about their homelife, you don't get the impression their parents spend a lot of time doing stuff with them (in my class of nine, for example, 1 had a DINNER made specifically for them but none of them ate as a family).
I would say my version of authority is not nearly as threatenning intimidating or punitive as past teachers used to utilize..

ED? And when I say a breakdown of authority, I don't mean for individuals so much as a shift from what is known as a "rule of law" society to a "face" society, where peer-to-peer influence plays a larger role in modifying behavior than adherence to a ruleset given by an authority figure.

And my kids are pretty brilliant in my class considering their struggles; Our government SUDDENLY (like 1 working day ago) asked for a complete list of ALL classroom violence or behaviours that threaten safety. From the day we were informed till the day it is collected, there is 3 days.
They won't simply take our log notes. Teachers are responsible for refilling out all their paperwork. The behaviour teacher for gr.1-3 has one boy so challenging that she will just end up writing a date, a list of behaviours and (x16, x20) and then do that every day he's been here. That's pedantic.
Anyways, I'm happy to say that I only had 3 incidents (same girl; all within a week; it was a struggle week for her for sure). My kids are calm, assurred and willing yo try for me.

Yeah, motivation is a challenge even outside of behavioral classes and documenting behaviors even in gen ed settings can be laborious.

I agree. ESP. at the high school level. At that point (like gr.12) I would have ZERO patience for parents complaints about those issues....so that probably wouldn't work for me.

Yeah, though there is still a line even with 12 graders to maintain professionalism.

I teacher junior high. The kids just arent that interested in the minutae of that part of my life. They tend to ask about my chickens, my music, my kids, and my free time a LOT more.

I'm a substitute, but mostly stick to upper high school, So for me building rapport has to be done quickly, and some kids are always curious. I get asked all kinds of questions and lately there seems to be a lot of interest in matters of faith among the kids I've encountered, it's probably one of the most common off-topic discussions I hear and while not the most frequent question I get(that is usually about my relationship status and if I have kids) its definitely one that comes up fairly frequently.

 

[Fervent]

He incurred great personal hardship trying to see how much prayer he could get in.

And such hardship shouldn't have been endured in the first place. So it's symptomatic of the problem.

What tactics are those? I just answered your question.

You grossly misrepresented my position in such a way that the deceit was more than likely intentional, basically creating a strawman.

What form is that? I can't see how forbidding all is anything other than even handed.

Irreligiosity/antireligion. It's not even handed at all, because it gives a privileged position to those hostile to religion and violates the free expression clause of the 1st amendment.

 

[Fervent]

He 'has no ground whatsoever"? How so?
Just because you disagree with the appropriateness of the SOURCE of that grounding, it doesn't mean he doesn't have grounding.

What is the SOURCE of the grounding? As far as I can tell, it all comes down to personal opinion and preferences which isn't really a ground.

hmmm.....
There isn't really a very long history of that either. It tends to just make a new denomination.

Depends on the tradition we're discussing, protestantism is fracturous but the traditional churches tend to be able to figure out their disagreements in most instances...though there are of course exceptions.

Pretty fair point. But I'm not sure we'd agree with what the rubric is best to use.

The fruit of the Spirit? Peace, love, gentleness, kindness, self-control, that sort of thing. Though perhaps you'd disagree, I'm open to other suggestions.

 

[Sportsballfan]

I have no idea what this post means...

Purse is a euphemism for [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] while bulldust is a euphemism for [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse].

 

[Fervent]

.... however, to be honest, I'm not really 'down' with Baphomet and kiddie statues.

I'd prefer they not be displayed, but I don't allow the trolls to determine what offends me. The intent of such statues is, by and large, to disrupt religious freedom by purposely offending religious sentiments. They are nothing but statues, and to allow the offense to take hold is to give power to the trolls. Allow them, and 99% of it will stop because the intended impact will be gone.

 

[Bradskii]

Purse is a euphemism for [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] while bulldust is a euphemism for [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse].

Well, that clears it up completely...

 

[Fervent]

It is not arbitrary. @Bradskii specifically was speaking of the Bill of Rights. (I thought he'd also directly mentioned the Constitution itself, but my point is not weakened by just the Bill of Rights.) The Bill of Rights was not imposed by force. Writing and approving it did not require violence. As @Bradskii stated, it was voted on by the Congress and the states. No violence. (The same is true of the Constitution, but it was not actually mentioned.) Even the other Amendments I mentioned (13th and 26th) were not imposed by force, but by Congress and the votes of the states. The same is true of even the Articles of Confederation. It was not imposed on the states or the people by force, but created by the Continental Congress and ratified by the states willingly.

There was no real transfer of power involved in the transition from the articles of confederation to the constitution, because the articles of confederation offered no real power to the federal government. The necessity of the constitution was clear because of the failures of the AoC, and the relevant transfer of power was seated in the revolutionary war(as well as Britains attempt to re-establish colonial power in the war of 1812)

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I'd prefer they not be displayed, but I don't allow the trolls to determine what offends me. The intent of such statues is, by and large, to disrupt religious freedom by purposely offending religious sentiments. They are nothing but statues, and to allow the offense to take hold is to give power to the trolls. Allow them, and 99% of it will stop because the intended impact will be gone.

As a person who has been impacted by the trolls, I'm not in a state of mind to feel assured that 99% of it will stop if "they're allowed."

When I was a kid, my dad, in his rough and tumble, All American, Boomer kind of way used to say, "... if you give them an inch, they'll take a foot." I never did quite understand the metaphor until latter in life when I realized...............I was indeed missing a foot.

Of course, I mean that metaphorically with the best, uncoddled Gen X aplomb I can muster.

 

[FireDragon76]

As a person who has been impacted by the trolls, I'm not in a state of mind to feel assured that 99% of it will stop if "they're allowed."

When I was a kid, my dad, in his rough and tumble, All American, Boomer kind of way used to say, "... if you give them an inch, they'll take a foot." I never did quite understand the metaphor until latter in life when I realized...............I was indeed missing a foot.

Of course, I mean that metaphorically with the best, uncoddled Gen X aplomb I can muster.

Maybe the more subtle slights to the Faith should have more weight than religious parodies like Baphomet?

Personally, I think it's been all downhill ever since NASA decided than an astronaut reading a bit of the Scriptures in space was offending tender sensibilities. That's when the midcentury consensus's construction of religious freedom slipped from mild-mannered tolerance to self-obsessed neurosis.

 

[rambot]

What is the SOURCE of the grounding? As far as I can tell, it all comes down to personal opinion and preferences which isn't really a ground.

I kinda disagree. Even when someone developes their own source for grounding, their environment, their friend group and their parents/family/etc are still the primary influencers in creating that grounding. So it is STILL coming from an external source. It's just different than a set of religious principles.
We don't develope in a vaccuum.

The fruit of the Spirit? Peace, love, gentleness, kindness, self-control, that sort of thing. Though perhaps you'd disagree, I'm open to other suggestions.

Nope. That's exactly me too.

 

[essentialsaltes]

So what is supposed to be accomplished with the form?

We would then finally have some oversight over their finances. How much do they pay their officers? How much do they take in? How much do they spend on charitable programs? Just as we have Charity Navigator to help rate charities to avoid giving away to scams, we could have Church Navigator, to assess whether church donations were being spent wisely.

 

[Hans Blaster]

There was no real transfer of power involved in the transition from the articles of confederation to the constitution, because the articles of confederation offered no real power to the federal government.

What? The Confederation Congress had powers, but they were quite limited. The Constitution also changed the relation between the states and the central government. The latter alone would constitute a "transfer of power" and it was peaceful.

The necessity of the constitution was clear because of the failures of the AoC, and the relevant transfer of power was seated in the revolutionary war

The Revolution was one transfer of power (and a violent one), the establishment of the Constitution was another (and it was non-violent).

(as well as Britains attempt to re-establish colonial power in the war of 1812)

LOL. Neither part of the establishment of the Constitution (nor Bill of Rights), nor correct.

All because you posted this:

I don't believe there truly is such a thing as a peaceful transfer of power, just a change in nominal leadership pursuing the same basic program under a different heading.

while pining for a trinitarian caliphate. It would appear all of this is either your broken understanding of secular republics (like ours), or you are trapped in your own predetermined position.

 

[BCP1928]

ED? And when I say a breakdown of authority, I don't mean for individuals so much as a shift from what is known as a "rule of law" society to a "face" society, where peer-to-peer influence plays a larger role in modifying behavior than adherence to a ruleset given by an authority figure.

The whole point of the United States is to throw off rulesets given by authority figures. Our rulesets are given by "we, the people" and our morals are our own business.

Yeah, motivation is a challenge even outside of behavioral classes and documenting behaviors even in gen ed settings can be laborious.

Yeah, though there is still a line even with 12 graders to maintain professionalism.

I'm a substitute, but mostly stick to upper high school, So for me building rapport has to be done quickly, and some kids are always curious. I get asked all kinds of questions and lately there seems to be a lot of interest in matters of faith among the kids I've encountered, it's probably one of the most common off-topic discussions I hear and while not the most frequent question I get(that is usually about my relationship status and if I have kids) its definitely one that comes up fairly frequently.

You really need to inform yourself more about what your rights actually are. The JDL and ACLU have put out useful information and your union will also have guidelines. The ACLU has also been forward in defending the rights of Evangelicals in the public school and may come to your defense if you run into trouble. You have more rights than you think and it is important that you be aware of them because school administrations will sometimes overreact, especially now that Evangelicalism has become so tainted in the public mind.

 

[Fervent]

We would then finally have some oversight over their finances. How much do they pay their officers? How much do they take in? How much do they spend on charitable programs? Just as we have Charity Navigator to help rate charities to avoid giving away to scams, we could have Church Navigator, to assess whether church donations were being spent wisely.

Churches file W-4s and I-9s, so pay is documented. Still not seeing what the benefit of requiring extra paperwork is supposed to be.

 

[Fervent]

I kinda disagree. Even when someone developes their own source for grounding, their environment, their friend group and their parents/family/etc are still the primary influencers in creating that grounding. So it is STILL coming from an external source. It's just different than a set of religious principles.
We don't develope in a vaccuum.

I'm more thinking metaphysical grounding, rather than developmental.

Nope. That's exactly me too.

It only makes sense. Everything else can be at odds, but if we can agree to be peacemakers and show the love of God our allegiance will be clear.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Churches file W-4s and I-9s, so pay is documented.

This is not public information, as it is for charities.