Print
The good that comes from belief
by Andrew Singleton, The Age
Thanks to Brian English for the link.
Reposted from:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/the-good-that-comes-from-belief/2007/11/09/1194329510058.html
Being religious makes for more ethical and giving young people, writes Andrew Singleton.
ATHEISM is the "new black". Of course, in Australia, we've always had atheists aplenty. Now, however, it is acceptable to come out of the closet of disbelief. The poster boy for this new atheism is British academic Richard Dawkins, whose book The God Delusion is a bestseller.
It is no surprise that atheists are finding their voice anew. Data from the most recent census show that more Australians do not identify with a religion. Indeed, the Christian denominations appear to be in steady decline, losing almost 7 per cent of those who previously identified with them in the decade to 2006. About 20 per cent of adults up to the age of 60 don't believe in God. Most of these have never believed. Now though, they are comfortable saying so.
Endless media representations of religious-related violence, whether in Baghdad or Ambon, confirm for many the profound destructiveness of fundamentalism and sectarianism. At the same time, the religious beliefs of the US President seem hypocritical considering many of his Administration's practices. And if they paid attention, unchurched Australians would hardly be impressed by the debates among Anglican leaders about female bishops.
For these kinds of reasons, more people seem to be concluding that we are better off without religion. And yet, as my colleagues and I document in our study of spirituality among young Australians, this is not necessarily the case. Religion is strongly associated with many positive life outcomes.
We found that one in five 13-to-24 year olds are actively religious, while about one in six could be described as atheists. The rest are religiously or spiritually disengaged but tend to either secular indifference or a superficial interest in the New Age.
But the most fascinating finding was the difference between the religious and the distinctly non-religious. The religiously active are more likely to have positive civic attitudes, display high levels of social concern and be actively involved in community service. Active Christians, for example, do much more hours of volunteer work per month than secular youth. On a measure of the extent to which a person holds positive human values — favouring an ethical life, justice for all and having an orientation to the common good — we also found the religiously active to be streets ahead.
These findings make sense when we consider that regular attendees at religious services are encouraged to lead altruistic and ethical lives and given ample opportunities to partake in community service.
What about the young atheists? Most secular-minded youth are more self-oriented because there is no widely understood or shared ethical alternative paradigm on which to model their lives. Despite recent commentary about "generation Y" being community-minded, our evidence suggests that the prevailing ethos of the past decade — individualism and consumerism — afflicts young people in spades. And the secular humanists and rationalists do not seem to be putting up a credible, earthly alternative way of life.
So where does this leave the new breed of atheists? Perhaps the vociferous anti-religious types such as Dawkins could afford to be a little less triumphalist. Some may see religion as a tired old superstition, but it does produce our most ethical and caring young adults — believe it or not.
Andrew Singleton works in the School of Political and Social Inquiry at Monash University. The Spirit of Generation Y, by Michael Mason, Andrew Singleton & Ruth Webber is published by John Garratt.
Reposted from:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/the-good-that-comes-from-belief/2007/11/09/1194329510058.html
Being religious makes for more ethical and giving young people, writes Andrew Singleton.
ATHEISM is the "new black". Of course, in Australia, we've always had atheists aplenty. Now, however, it is acceptable to come out of the closet of disbelief. The poster boy for this new atheism is British academic Richard Dawkins, whose book The God Delusion is a bestseller.
It is no surprise that atheists are finding their voice anew. Data from the most recent census show that more Australians do not identify with a religion. Indeed, the Christian denominations appear to be in steady decline, losing almost 7 per cent of those who previously identified with them in the decade to 2006. About 20 per cent of adults up to the age of 60 don't believe in God. Most of these have never believed. Now though, they are comfortable saying so.
Endless media representations of religious-related violence, whether in Baghdad or Ambon, confirm for many the profound destructiveness of fundamentalism and sectarianism. At the same time, the religious beliefs of the US President seem hypocritical considering many of his Administration's practices. And if they paid attention, unchurched Australians would hardly be impressed by the debates among Anglican leaders about female bishops.
For these kinds of reasons, more people seem to be concluding that we are better off without religion. And yet, as my colleagues and I document in our study of spirituality among young Australians, this is not necessarily the case. Religion is strongly associated with many positive life outcomes.
We found that one in five 13-to-24 year olds are actively religious, while about one in six could be described as atheists. The rest are religiously or spiritually disengaged but tend to either secular indifference or a superficial interest in the New Age.
But the most fascinating finding was the difference between the religious and the distinctly non-religious. The religiously active are more likely to have positive civic attitudes, display high levels of social concern and be actively involved in community service. Active Christians, for example, do much more hours of volunteer work per month than secular youth. On a measure of the extent to which a person holds positive human values — favouring an ethical life, justice for all and having an orientation to the common good — we also found the religiously active to be streets ahead.
These findings make sense when we consider that regular attendees at religious services are encouraged to lead altruistic and ethical lives and given ample opportunities to partake in community service.
What about the young atheists? Most secular-minded youth are more self-oriented because there is no widely understood or shared ethical alternative paradigm on which to model their lives. Despite recent commentary about "generation Y" being community-minded, our evidence suggests that the prevailing ethos of the past decade — individualism and consumerism — afflicts young people in spades. And the secular humanists and rationalists do not seem to be putting up a credible, earthly alternative way of life.
So where does this leave the new breed of atheists? Perhaps the vociferous anti-religious types such as Dawkins could afford to be a little less triumphalist. Some may see religion as a tired old superstition, but it does produce our most ethical and caring young adults — believe it or not.
Andrew Singleton works in the School of Political and Social Inquiry at Monash University. The Spirit of Generation Y, by Michael Mason, Andrew Singleton & Ruth Webber is published by John Garratt.
Add to del.icio.us
Posted: Friday, November 9, 2007 | PermalinkComments 1 - 50 of 50 |
Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers2. Comment #86567 by rev on November 9, 2007 at 4:10 pm
are you for real ?Other Comments by rev
3. Comment #86568 by Andrew Brown on November 9, 2007 at 4:13 pm
I would love to see the actual research. Anyone smell conformation bias at all?Other Comments by Andrew Brown
4. Comment #86570 by rev on November 9, 2007 at 4:14 pm
Not you mango,Singleton.Other Comments by rev
5. Comment #86574 by Mango on November 9, 2007 at 4:23 pm
Gracias for the clarification, 'migo. Other Comments by Mango
6. Comment #86577 by John Done on November 9, 2007 at 4:33 pm
I'm trying to think of who it was who said "To say that a religious man is happier than a nonbeliever proves nothing more than stating that a drunk man is happier than a sober one". Saying that religion makes people happy answers next to nothing about whether or not it's true, or wise, or safe.I'm sick of this insinuation in the media that religious moderates have it right. Maybe they need to be reminded of why we bring up fundamentalists at all.
I also have a concern for this indifference that's gripping the youth of the developed world; it mostly has to do with a combination of the spread of technology making things easier (and making people lazier), a disillusionment with contemporary religious and political ideas, and the influence of relativist and postmodern ideas of what truth is. I do see the need for something more active and positive for people to have greater meaning in their lives. However, a turn to old religion and reviving passionate spiritualism hardly seems to be the answer.
Perhaps we do need to support a positive belief. A secular form of spirituality that embraces true non-speculative science and doesn't include any metaphysical bullshit would certainly hook us all of the mystics (if you're into that sort of thing). But there are already a number of secular communities and organizations advocating science and reason to enhance human happiness and understanding; it seems almost everyone in the media chooses to ignore these groups to make this heretical trend seem like a movement of angry teenagers.
Regardless of who's happier than who or who's scaring off potential converts, this kind of "well, atheists have problems too" shit isn't helping. We'll figure out what's *real* first, and then we'll decide what to do with ourselves.
Other Comments by John Done
7. Comment #86580 by Diacanu on November 9, 2007 at 4:39 pm
The good that comes from belief
Argghh!! I'm so SICK of this argument!!
Santa belief makes children behave better, so why not keep it into adulthood?
BECAUSE IT'S NOT TRUE!!!
AND IT'S INFANTILE!!!!!
Other Comments by Diacanu
8. Comment #86590 by Smythe on November 9, 2007 at 4:54 pm
On a measure of the extent to which a person holds positive human values — favouring an ethical life, justice for all and having an orientation to the common good — we also found the religiously active to be streets ahead.
Could the crux of his argument be a little more vague? I must have missed the meeting where terms like 'ethical life' and 'orientation to the common good' were universally defined. Mr. Singleton was evidently at this meeting since he has apparently measured these variables precisely across different test groups. Otherwise, he would just be fallaciously representing his own opinion as scientific truth, and nobody leading the Ethical Life of an Active Christian would do that, would they?
I can offer some clarification though. A 'street' is equal to exactly 2.4x more ethical, hope that helps.
Other Comments by Smythe
9. Comment #86592 by Pieter on November 9, 2007 at 4:59 pm
Corollary effects of religion are simply one facet of the argument, and plenty of evidence can be dredged up by all sides to support any position. Still, it all simply has no bearing on the far more important question- are religions true?Other Comments by Pieter
10. Comment #86595 by JamesDB on November 9, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Hasn't this argument been dismissed time and time again. Why don't these columnists ever read any other articles related before sending it out. They need to stop being so lazy and read a little, then they would realize there is no point in printing articles saying what dozens of people said before them.
Other Comments by JamesDB
11. Comment #86597 by Diacanu on November 9, 2007 at 5:03 pm
JamesDB-They need to stop being so lazy and read a little, then they would realize there is no point in printing articles saying what dozens of people said before them.
Because then they wouldn't be able to go "look mommy and daddy!! My name is print! I AM somebody!! The guidance counselor was wrong!! Love me!! Love mee-hee-hee-heee!!!!".
If they had to come up with an original thought, it would be months later, or possibly never.
Can't have that.
Other Comments by Diacanu
12. Comment #86600 by BAEOZ on November 9, 2007 at 5:11 pm
To sum up the good points above:1. How biased is the research? I mean, if you ask christians should they love their neighbor or does their church group support charities you've already assumed the answer. It's gonna be "Yes, my imaginary friend and his institution are wonderful." The measurement variables in these research efforts are dodgy and only designed to get the answer the researcher is looking for. It's not science.
2. Even if the research is correct, that christian youths are more oriented toward doing some kind of "good" that doesn't prove anything. Giving junkies free smack and needles makes them feel better too. That must be some kind of good.
3. None of the above 2 arguments affect the question of whether there is or isn't a god.
Other Comments by BAEOZ
13. Comment #86605 by Ben Jennings on November 9, 2007 at 5:16 pm
Christian definition of volunteer work: laboring in one's spare time in order to increase one's chances of going to heaven. Other Comments by Ben Jennings
14. Comment #86608 by Dr Benway on November 9, 2007 at 5:24 pm
Non-believers do disorganized charity, which is more difficult to measure than the organized group charity of churches. I'll use my husband as an example: regular NPR doner, volunteer track coach, volunteering at local races, supporting the Leukemia Society, informal tutoring, helping friends move, visiting sick friends in the hospital, and so on. Other Comments by Dr Benway
15. Comment #86610 by Bonzai on November 9, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Religious charities are often a vehicle for recruitment. This has to be factored in and adjusted for before any conclusion can be drawn.Other Comments by Bonzai
16. Comment #86611 by Diacanu on November 9, 2007 at 5:32 pm
Sorry if my rant in post 11 was a little too caustic, but the decline in journalism really chaps me.I want to be a writer, and magazines may be my way in, but if standards are decaying so badly, what am I to make of my own writing?
Competing against fevered egos who don't give the slightest shit about quality is just so disheartening.
Other Comments by Diacanu
17. Comment #86612 by ProfessorGasCan on November 9, 2007 at 5:35 pm
*kicks desk*Talk about trying to discredit atheists as good citizens. I'd like to know more about their "evidence" they spoke of.
Other Comments by ProfessorGasCan
18. Comment #86614 by notsobad on November 9, 2007 at 5:42 pm
I'd like to see the actual research. Other Comments by notsobad
19. Comment #86616 by Diacanu on November 9, 2007 at 5:45 pm
That does it.I can't take it anymore.
My anger at crap hackery can't fester inside my head anymore, I have to DO something about it.
Coulter, D'Souza, Behe, Limbaugh, etc, etc, they're all awful, and they don't give a shit.
It's all about ego and money, and I can't stand it anymore.
I've got to make a career to have the momentum to swing to fight this crap.
I've got to get writing.
I've put it off too long.
Other Comments by Diacanu
20. Comment #86618 by A. Person on November 9, 2007 at 5:54 pm
Deep down, most people don't care about the "truth value" of claims.Other Comments by A. Person
21. Comment #86625 by atheist_peace on November 9, 2007 at 6:18 pm
"Active Christians, for example, do much more hours of volunteer work per month than secular youth."I assume most of this "volunteer" work is at church.
Other Comments by atheist_peace
22. Comment #86626 by black wolf on November 9, 2007 at 6:53 pm
I found this on the study:http://www.monash.edu.au/news/newsline/story/971
and
http://dlibrary.acu.edu.au/research/ccls/spir/sppub/sppub.htm
surprise surprise
catholic university
study which they've made a book out of which is coincidentally for sale for only 40-50AU$
my pdf plugin is damaged, so please someone look into the study linked above and comment on their methods / questionnaire.
good night
Other Comments by black wolf
23. Comment #86627 by Rtambree on November 9, 2007 at 7:00 pm
20. Comment #86618 by A. Person on November 9, 2007 at 5:54 pm>Deep down, most people don't care about the "truth value" of claims.
Even if it's correct, it's a pretty misanthropic view - to paraphrase, it's saying humans can't handle truth - they need a layer of fantasy, a security blanket, in order to keep going.
However, the enormous variation in religiosity between countries suggests that there is strong cultural component (it's not all "human nature"). There's also a strong correlation between science literacy and irreligiosity, so I would counter that people CAN handle the truth if conditions are right (education, standard of living, economic security, etc).
Other Comments by Rtambree
24. Comment #86628 by Diacanu on November 9, 2007 at 7:09 pm
Even if it's correct, it's a pretty misanthropic view - to paraphrase, it's saying humans can't handle truth - they need a layer of fantasy, a security blanket, in order to keep going.
And it's exactly the belief that religionists and religion exploiters use to justify their shit shoveling.
That's why I steer clear of it.
Other Comments by Diacanu
27. Comment #86633 by BAEOZ on November 9, 2007 at 7:27 pm
It's interesting that the majority of people contacted, refused to do the survey when they understood the subject matter (63%). That alone suggests a sample bias. The results can't be generalized to the population. Other Comments by BAEOZ
28. Comment #86635 by PeterK on November 9, 2007 at 7:34 pm
Fickin boolshiezeOther Comments by PeterK
29. Comment #86647 by BAEOZ on November 9, 2007 at 8:18 pm
Your true nature is Supreme Bliss
Does that come in caramel flavour?
I think caramel is the most blissful flavour. Thus, supreme bliss would have to be caramel flavoured. QED.
Other Comments by BAEOZ
30. Comment #86649 by notsobad on November 9, 2007 at 8:34 pm
I've been reading the qualitative analysis of interviews and is good for a laugh but also has some good information. It's biased though. For example, "most of our informants were secondary students, and nearly all of these were attending church-affiliated schools." The whole narrative part calls good behaviour Christian or religious values and if someone has religious background, it surely had a positive effect ("Growing up religious does make a difference").It has some comedy value:
Q:What do you believe about God and Jesus?
A:God created the world, and for some reason God created man, and man did something that God told him not to and that had a huge effect on everything, and then God sent his son, Jesus, to fix it.
Q:Do you think the miracle stories are true?
A:I would assume so, I have no reason to suspect that they are not.
Some 17 yo Catholic
Q:So what do you believe about God?
A:God, he did a lot for us. Like, I mean, the fact that he'd die for us.
Q:And what do you believe happens after death?
A:Heaven, hell, purgatory … I think that like we all go to purgatory … I reckon you stay there until you've paid off your sins, you've repented for what you've done. I'm big on the purgatory thing.
And this is how the numbers of theists are inflated:
(another person)
Q:So do you think of yourself as a Christian or do you think of yourself as a...?
A:Well, I don't really know what a Christian is. I don't see the difference between Christian and Catholic, so I just say I'm a Catholic because I've been brought up in a Catholic family.
The conclusion of this study is contrary to this propaganda piece from Singleton:
"In our study religiosity did not appear to be strongly linked with a particular civic orientation." And 5 out of 7 "strong" humanists and only 6 out of 23 traditional theists were rated as having High civic orientation.
"Having a strong and clearly defined value system that has as its base, social concern and responsibility towards others, seems to be a factor in determining who is likely to be heavily involved in civic participation."
Other Comments by notsobad
31. Comment #86650 by sanjiv on November 9, 2007 at 8:36 pm
These religious writers miss an important point.You only need one atheist doing the same good work the Christians do, without jotting up points for encashment with a supernatural entity or future rewards system, to prove that there are alternative, better, unifying and more economical drivers for doing the same good.
Other Comments by sanjiv
32. Comment #86663 by nothing on November 9, 2007 at 10:32 pm
My anger at crap hackery can't fester inside my head anymore, I have to DO something about it.
Coulter, D'Souza, Behe, Limbaugh, etc, etc, they're all awful, and they don't give a shit.
It's all about ego and money, and I can't stand it anymore.
I've got to make a career to have the momentum to swing to fight this crap.
I've got to get writing.
Please do. Although I try to take a more charitable view of these writers (i.e. they are self-deceived), they end up deceiving others. Ignorance is thus perpetuated. With ignorance comes fear. Bertrand Russell, quite correctly, regarded "religion as a disease born of fear and as a source of untold misery to the human race."
Other Comments by nothing
33. Comment #86676 by epeeist on November 9, 2007 at 11:58 pm
This sounds like a poor version of the Brook's book (Religious Faith and Charitable Giving) which purports to show that the religious give more to charity and volunteer more than the non-religious.As has been pointed out though religions are charities and any money donated or work done for them counts in they tally.
I haven't read the book itself, but I have read an article which is an extract. I would be interested to know what a real statistician would think both of the book and this study.
Other Comments by epeeist
34. Comment #86705 by Goldy on November 10, 2007 at 2:24 am
Your true nature is Supreme Bliss
Does that come in caramel flavour?
I think caramel is the most blissful flavour. Thus, supreme bliss would have to be caramel flavoured. QED
Unbeliever - it's chocolate - dark chocolate. Or beer...hmmmm, beer! Ooooh blissful amber fluid...droool!
Damn, can't even get that right without going off on tangents.
Still chocolate over caramel ;-p
Other Comments by Goldy
35. Comment #86707 by Conrad on November 10, 2007 at 2:34 am
This is shite. First of all crowing about 13-24 year old's being in church is what's to be expected. Unless you leave the home at twelve and get to declare your disbelief, then we should expect those numbers to be higher. Only after leaving home and being on your own for a good set of years would we expect that familial pressures would abate enough to declare yourself an non-believer.As for the studies findings in "positive" points, we can quicky question the terms "ethical life" good "volunteer work" and "positive civic activities". In my time in the church, I spent time at homeless shelters serving soup ONLY so that I could preach to the homeless. In some shelters you can't get food UNLESS you profess belief.
I regret the capitalization, but I don't have enough net savy to write in italics online.
Also, the idea of more chrisitians supporting an ethical life leaves open the very question of what it means to be ethical! And anyone who follows the mainstream teaching against homosexuals, the "christian" subjugation of women, or the endorsements of violence, don't count as a voice of ethics as far as I'm concerned.
We then have the same problems as far as "civic activities" are concerned. Yes, you pick up trash, so only to be around the public in order to show them how wonderful you are. It's not about actually picking up trash for it's own sake. It's about making a positive impression. If none of these activities made a positive impression on non-believers then less churches would participate in them, because they don't actually help the churches main goal: adding numbers. It's not about good for its own sake. It's about numbers.
Other Comments by Conrad
36. Comment #86712 by GordonHide on November 10, 2007 at 2:39 am
Two points about this article and the posts so far.People are right to be suspicious about the quality of this research. I remember similar research where survey respondents were asked to rate human qualities most important to society. The religious did well there too with high votes for love, friendship, compassion etc. Of course, practical qualities, which atheists might have chosen, such as organisational ability, planning skills, problem solving skills, ability to work in teams and respect for the rule of law, did not form part of the survey at all.
Secondly, if you want a good counter example of atheist "charity", look at the Scandinavian countries where atheists predominate. They are, of course, properly organised. Giving is through a progressive tax system. Every citizen gets good quality health care irrespective of means. Every citizen has dignity and security in old age and infirmity and the education systems put these countries at the top of international league tables. And still these countries spend more as a proportion of GNP on international aid than most.
Other Comments by GordonHide
37. Comment #86721 by Corylus on November 10, 2007 at 2:57 am
I found the emphasis on 'young atheists' very interesting.If you are talking about the charitable deeds of the religious vs the non-religious then the age is irrelevant.
(Except that maybe the young as a group don't donote so much for the simply reason they have less money)
So why this focussing on spotty youth? I think I know why. Every generation has a tendency to worry about the one that comes after it. E.g. "The youth of today - no manners - no standards!" People who do this have a tendency to forget some of their own actions and views at this age.
I think the subtext of this article is about fear. Fear of young people, what they get up to generally, and what they might or might not do.
This will be used as justification for drumming religious teaching into the young.
Other Comments by Corylus
38. Comment #86730 by JemyM on November 10, 2007 at 3:14 am
Deontological ethics are for children and young adults, but modern books for children makes a better job to explain proper behavior than the bible. Jesus do not even begin to explain what a modern child need to know, including not talking to strangers, not play in traffic and not taking drugs. Deontological ethics can be used as a guideline as an adult but yet again the bible do not offer the kind of ethics that an adult need to know, such as social etiquette and how to interract with other cultures.The ability to distinguish right from wrong as an adult comes from experience and knowledge. Wisdom becomes your moral compass, which is why someone who gives up personal wisdom to favor religious ethics are less moral. They simply do not know how to behave.
The claim that religion is a "moral compass" is the defense of a sect that use the most absurd arguments to remain in power. Theese sects do not have monopoly on anything. Not morals. Not the story on where we came from. Not even spirituality. Theese sects should be exposed for the immoral frauds that they are. At best they exploit good people for their own sinister agendas.
Other Comments by JemyM
39. Comment #86740 by anonquick on November 10, 2007 at 3:37 am
This post is for the more philosophical in the audience, you Godless evil doers.There is an ape on the planet that can use language to:
1. Think.
2. Communicate.
3. Do things.
I think this is useful for thinking about beliefs, thoughts, memes, etc. (particularly 1 and 3).
Various religious communities have a body of thinking, the the individual tenets can be put before the rational mind and interrogated for truth or falsity. That is ONE thing you can do.
Another thing you can do is look at how these tenets individually and collectively modulate and drive behaviour.
I think you can do the same thing with the threads or the fabrics of secular thinking - look at them for determine their truth value, or you can judge them in terms of action.
So you unbelieving devils! Who is with me in demanding that the Richard Dawkins Centre for Science and Reason organised us cats to give money to good causes and do good works?
Other Comments by anonquick
40. Comment #86778 by alexmzk on November 10, 2007 at 6:19 am
voluntary work is no accurate measure of selflessness. hell, i'd be doing voluntary work if i had time, but i'm at uni, working towards a degree.Other Comments by alexmzk
41. Comment #86786 by STLstrike3 on November 10, 2007 at 6:32 am
This drivel makes me sick. The faithful turn to this one as a last resort when they realize they can't provide any valid data to support the truth value of their religion.I, also, would like to see the research methods. Show me the data.
I can tell you though, as one of them darn homosexuals, I am a far happier individual without the belief in the threat of the Lake of Fire.
Other Comments by STLstrike3
42. Comment #86790 by Theocrapcy on November 10, 2007 at 6:46 am
As an Aussie, I am very embarrassed by this.Utter drivel.
And this from a supposed academic. I wonder if Monash know that one of their staff is pushing religion in their politics and society studies.
Shankar Wolf, what drugs are you on buddy, and where can I get them?
Other Comments by Theocrapcy
43. Comment #86814 by Mango on November 10, 2007 at 7:58 am
If a judge sentences a person to do some community service, does that "volunteer work" have the same ethical value as someone who does community service because he believes God wants him to? Other Comments by Mango
44. Comment #86899 by notsobad on November 10, 2007 at 11:52 am
And here are the financial sponsors:Catholic Education Commission of Queensland, Catholic Education Commission of Victoria, Catholic Education Commission of Tasmania, Catholic Education Commission of Canberra-Goulburn, Catholic Education Office of Sydney, Catholic Education Office of Parramatta, Broken Bay Diocesan Catholic Schools Office, Catholic Education South Australia, Catholic Education Office of Lismore, Salesians of St John Bosco, Council for Christian Education in Schools, Lutheran Schools Australia, Lutheran Church National Office, Salvation Army (Southern Territory), Seventh-day Adventist Church (Australia), Victorian Council for Christian Education, Uniting Education, YMCA.
Now imagine his final statement would be that you don't need a (Christian) God and religion to be a good member of the society...
Other Comments by notsobad
45. Comment #86946 by fin on November 10, 2007 at 1:50 pm
John Done:I'm trying to think of who it was who said "To say that a religious man is happier than a nonbeliever proves nothing more than stating that a drunk man is happier than a sober one".George Bernard Shaw.
http://quotationspage.com/quote/458.html
Other Comments by fin
46. Comment #87070 by Jamougha on November 11, 2007 at 6:20 am
"The Spirit of Generation Y project (2003-2006), conducted by Monash University, the Australian Catholic University and the Christian Research Association"from http://www.monash.edu.au/news/newsline/story/971
Yeah call me a cynic...
Other Comments by Jamougha
47. Comment #87353 by Philip1978 on November 12, 2007 at 12:46 am
Diacanu You write it I will read it! I always enjoy reading your posts, I think you have a very direct and informed viewpoint that does you great credit.
This article is drivel to the point of absurdity, what the hell is this?
"Some may see religion as a tired old superstition, but it does produce our most ethical and caring young adults — believe it or not"
That same tired and arrogant argument of "I believe in God so that makes my caring for people that much better than those amoral naughty atheists, ohh smug me!"
No good can come from thinking like this, only blind stupidity and cruelty to the credulous. Filling people's heads with lies like this is dangerous, once people start relying on the supernatural for moral guidance, the torturous effects of blaming themselves for not adhering to the rules imposed on them is not going to help one bit. You have to care for somebody because you mean it, not imagine it.
Philip
Other Comments by Philip1978
48. Comment #87366 by Russell Blackford on November 12, 2007 at 1:41 am
Well, it's a very good university. :) What's more, there may be something to it - a lot of the nicest and brightest teenagers are the ones who are serious about the meaning of life, blah, blah, and often they do explore religion. Or so it was in my day. I don't think it's especially embarrassing thing to concede that this may still be true.But I wonder whether the research is not distorted by the researchers' value judgments. What is wrong with individualism and consumerism? I'm not saying that nothing at all is ever wrong with them (although I generally consider individualism to be a good thing): I'd just like to know exactly what is wrong with them, and why they are automatically considered to be disvalues.
It sounds as if religious young people may give some sort of support to the collectivist, self-denying values promulgated by religion, which is hardly unexpected. How do they fare on such values as individual liberty, sensuality, and self-expression? How do they fare on such disvalues as authoritarianism, asceticism, and self-abasement? Just wondering.
Edit: reading the posts by notsobad above, I see that there's a great deal of doubt as to whether the research results are accurately reported in this article. Sigh. I don't have time to dig into it and form my own view on that.
Other Comments by Russell Blackford
49. Comment #87390 by irate_atheist on November 12, 2007 at 2:39 am
Dear Mr Singleton,I'll see your burning bush and divided seas, and raise you one Loch Ness monster and two Yeti. Now, what cards are you left holding?
Yours sincerely,
Irate Atheist
P.S. My 'Roswell Incident' trumps your 'Global Flood' due to the number of surviving witnesses.
Other Comments by irate_atheist
50. Comment #87974 by Russell Blackford on November 13, 2007 at 11:40 pm
This story from a year or two ago in the National Catholic Reporter might give them pause:http://ncronline.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2006a/032406/032406h.htm
According to Pew Research, Christians, especially Catholics, were more likely than secular people to condone torture in some circumstances.
Other Comments by Russell Blackford
Upcoming Events:
About this site
Mailing List Signup: Enter your email
Go to The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science
Richard Dawkins Articles | Comments | Tour Journal
Atheist Resources | Local Groups
Debate Points | Latest Responses
Audio Books
The God Delusion
Read by
Richard Dawkins &
Lalla Ward
The Ancestor's Tale
Read by
Richard Dawkins &
Lalla Ward
On the Origin of Species
Read by
Richard Dawkins
Links:
Quote:
"It is almost as if the human brain were specifically designed to misunderstand Darwinism, and to find it hard to believe.."
Richard Dawkins
Other Recommended Reading
Why Darwin Matters
Michael Shermer
Read the 1st Chapter!
God Is Not Great
Christopher Hitchens
Read the 1st Chapter!
Under the Banner of Heaven
Jon Krakauer
More Books
Adjust font size: 
"If this book doesn't change the world -- we're all screwed."
-Penn (Penn & Teller)
The God Delusion
by Richard Dawkins
Over 1.5 million copies sold
DVDs
'The Genius of Charles Darwin' DVD (PAL Region 2 ONLY)
'Enemies of Reason' DVD
'Voices of Science' DVD
'The Four Horsemen' DVD
'Root of All Evil? The Original Program' DVD
'Growing Up in the Universe' DVD
'Break the Science Barrier' DVD
Books by Richard Dawkins
The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing
by Richard Dawkins
The Selfish Gene
by Richard Dawkins
The Blind Watchmaker
by Richard Dawkins
The Ancestor's Tale
by Richard Dawkins
Unweaving the Rainbow
by Richard Dawkins
1. Comment #86566 by Mango on November 9, 2007 at 4:09 pm
And also our most inhumane, sadistic, murderous young adults.
And I'd like to know how "ethics" and "caring" were measured. If they'd have asked, "Do you think most people alive today will burn forever in Hell?" how well do you think the religious would have done?
Other Comments by Mango