I’m Jewish, and believed before I became an atheist. Are we supposed to follow the laws laid down by your false Messiah and his wacko followers?
Are you aware that one of the reasons for the protection of religious freedom in Virginia, which was a source of the Constitutional one, was that the Baptists, a minority, were being oppressed?
You might try arguing for your position instead of quoting something many of us think is total bullshit - and not just atheists.
Let’s start with how much of the Bible do you believe is true? Is there a hell? How come Jesus never came back? How come the story of the virgin birth was written due to the author not having a good translation of the real Bible?
And how come are the most supposedly religious leaders are real shits?
Bruiser1036, do you believe in the Immaculate Conception of Mary?
There are a lot of countries around the world that are more religious or less religious than the USA. Finland, Sweden, Denmark, France, Germany, etc. are all far less religious; Indonesia, Brazil, Yemen, etc. are far more religious*. This should pose a natural experiment of sorts. In countries that are less religious, we should see more anti-christian bigotry, more “moral relativism” (I’m not sure what you mean by that, honestly), and more hatred of Christian biblical principles.
We can test this. We can also test whether these amount to bad things - whether countries that are more or less religious are better or worse places to live. Do you think this is a useful or valid test?
*I’m trying really hard to pick countries that are advanced and successful here, but there really aren’t that many first-world countries above the US on the “importance of religion” scale - which should be a bit of a hint as to how this test will go. 
Do the moral laws in the new testament include the ritual laws of the old testament? I’m not sure what you’re about to say, and that’s the important part. Your answer to this question doesn’t particularly interest me that much - the point is that I’ve heard different answers from different Christians. The issue of what even qualifies as “moral law” is not clear. Like most things in the bible, you have to interpret it, and different sects of Christianity have different opinions on what it means. Some issues there is reasonable consensus on, but even on the issue of same-sex marriage, Christians seem to be splitting. These are questions without easy answers, and where there is quite a lot of discord within Christianity.
You know what the most interesting thing about this is? I could advise you to “get your house in order before speaking for Christianity”, but if you did, if all of the Christians in the US got on the same page about what agenda they want passed, they would form a permanent supermajority capable of passing basically whatever they wanted. Any candidate running on the platform of “I speak for the consensus Christian view” would get 70% of the vote in the national election and at least 50% of the vote in over half of all state elections. Christians, could they agree on what they wanted, would control every branch of government with enough power to reshape the constitution however they pleased - so we wouldn’t have this issue to begin with. (In fact, they kinda do.) The problem is not just “atheists disagree with Christians”. It’s also “Christians disagree with Christians”. Or why do you think there are 33,000 different Christian sects? It’s the classic joke all over again:
Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump.
I said, “Don’t do it!”
He said, “Nobody loves me.”
I said, “God loves you. Do you believe in God?”
He said, “Yes.”
I said, “Are you a Christian or a Jew?”
He said, “A Christian.”
I said, “Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?”
He said, “Protestant.”
I said, “Me, too! What franchise?”
He said, “Baptist.”
I said, “Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?”
He said, “Northern Baptist.”
I said, “Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?”
He said, “Northern Conservative Baptist.”
I said, “Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?”
He said, “Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region.”
I said, “Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?”
He said, “Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912.”
I said, “Die, heretic!” And I pushed him over.
Here’s a question for you whose answer I actually am quite interested in - why do you think there are so many disagreements as to what God actually wants from us?
So how 'bout you figure out what that is and convince every other Christian to work with you on that? Because at that point you don’t need a single vote from anyone who is not a Christian, and probably not even a single vote from anyone who isn’t highly religious to boot.
Two comments about the thread’s title.
(1) OP doesn’t write “Many Americans say churches are bad.” Instead he writes “Many Liberal Democrats say churches are bad.” Is this a pro-Christianity screed or an anti-Democrat screed?
(2) As indicated in the thread title, the poll didn’t ask what Americans thought about religion or Christianity; it asked what they thought about churches. The poll result would have been at least a little different if they’d asked about religion. America’s churches include some preaching the “prosperity gospel” or other aberrations. Perhaps OP will comment on Joel Osteen’s church and what he thinks of people who view it negatively.
Given this…
…the latter seems likely.
I’m guessing he’s one of those people who pastes a thin veneer of religiosity over his political beliefs so that he can claim anyone who opposes his political beliefs must hate God. I seem to encounter a lot of them. Sadly, many of them don’t even seem to realize that they’re doing it, nor what this implies for their actual faith.
You can inform us better if you say which religious sect you belong to and/or what your Bible of preference is.
Anyway the actual Pew poll is interesting and brings to mind Pratchett’s Small Gods as much as anything else: as septimus notes above, the issue is not an increase belief in the harmfulness of religion or of belief but of the ways in which the institutions of religion have been abused and are abusive.
Some of the reasons for an increase in the distrust of the institutions by liberals may be the use of fundamentalist religious institutions to promote an imposition of intolerance but I wonder. Just as colleges have always politically been liberal hotbeds ('60s anyone?) fundamentalist churches as institutions have always promoted a Religious Right political agenda. How much (if any) of this is a bleed from liberal Catholics whose faith in the institution of the Church was shaken by the sexual abuse scandals with what has looked like cover-ups and protections given to abusing priests?
In any case I think it is true that those who identify as “liberal Democrats” are more likely than those who identify as “moderate” or “more conservative” Democrats to not regularly attend services. Those who regularly attend are more likely to think of “the institution” as their local congregation and see what good it does for its local members and “By two-to-one (58% to 29%), more conservative and moderate Democrats say churches have a positive than negative effect on the country.” Those who do not attend regularly are, I think, more likely to judge the institutions of religion by the headlines.
The religiously unaffiliated (over-represented within the liberal Democratic cohort) do not necessarily have “a God problem” (although to be sure there are a few hard atheists who do); they do have a problem with how bad people use the idea of God by way of the institutions. (Wasn’t it “It’s a Wonderful Life” that taught us that God uses the good ones and the bad ones use God?)
This is my attitude, as well.
At the time this great country was founded abortion was legal in all states. Furthermore the Bible, a book that lays out lots of highly specific laws on the food people eat and even the type of fibers allowed in their clothing, NEVER forbids abortion even though the concept was quite common throughout the ancient world. The only radical approach is coming from the Republicans who are increasingly adamant about depriving woman of the right to control their bodies.
Remember this is the G_d that says a bastard should not be admitted to a congregation even unto the 10th generation which only illustrates how that G_d views illegitimate children as something less than human.
Judean People’s Front…[sneer]
In some of Mark Twain’s writing, there is a man who asked the priest what he must do to get to Heaven, he told him he should emulate God who art in Heaven. Did you ever read what that man did?
The only thing crystal clear is how he cares as less for the fetus as he does human life time and time again. Often it’s God or his favorites doing the killing too. If you are like many conservatives who take a literal view of many of the stories, how many of the women do you think were child-bearing when God destroyed all but a few with the flood?
“Every day people are straying away from the church and going back to God.” - Lenny Bruce
Which Bible?
Interesting facts about the above Lenny Bruce quote. The interpretation of the quote varies according to whether one believes Our Lenny said “everyday” (as a descriptor to imply the more or less common and ordinary person, “everyday people”), or “every day”, to imply that it is a constant and relentless hemorrhage of believers. No direct audio recording exists, which has led to strenuous and frequently violent disagreement among the Lennyist community.
Personally, I hold with the Disunitarian Conclave, urging all concerned to seize a point of view and adhere to the true words of Our Lenny, and take all necessary steps to protect that truth from assholes, heretics and lying scum. I have no opinion as to which view is truthful, but simply for the entertainment value of watching idiots beat the crap out of each other.
Luckily there’s an abundance of idiots. Hell, if we could fuel society on idiots we’d be gods.
I think I’ve just had an idea of how this whole thing actually works.
Ideally we’d vote for a man that was Pro-Life for 70 of his 70 years, but given out choices are one that’s currently Pro-Life and one that’s currently Pro-Choice the choice is obvious. We know he’s a pussy grabber but our view is all politicians are scumbags and we’re not electing the Pope, so we go for the scumbag that supports our policy positions, whatever personal shortcomings the other side brings up are irrelevant.
Or, you could have nominated someone else…
That’s the great thing about supporting the king of all scumbags, he’s so reliable.