# Secularism gaining ground in the US ? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 10, 2009, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923 "2009-03-10T05:22:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/41 "2009-03-10T19:51:04Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > No. Secularism is the lack of religious entanglement with government, not simply the lack of state sponsorship. > > We have had lots of entanglement since the beginning, as I have already pointed out. > Beyond that, we actually did have state sponsorship of religion for many ears, (and a claim that that was only among a couple of states does not remove it from the history of the nation). > > Since I have made no reference to atheism in any context, this appears to be a red herring or a straw man position. > You are simply playing word games in which secularism is an on/off state. In fact, secularism exists on a continuum. The country began with a strong leaning toward secularism but with a still significant religious entanglement and has moved (with fits and starts) toward a more secular situation, but it is not a simple matter of “yes, we are” vs “no, we are not.” Fair enough. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/42 "2009-03-10T19:59:39Z")
> [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](#): > > Sigh. > > Fifty-four thousand people is an absolutely _enormous_ sample for a survey, and if the selection process has been reasonably random, the results are almost guaranteed to match those that would be obtained by polling the whole population within a couple of percent. Usually a few thousand are adequate to reduce the confidence interval to something tiny. I pulled out my copy of Cochrane and got sqrt (pq/n) as .0027, using p = q = .5 as I usually do to be conservative. That is tiny. It is .011 for the more normal sample of 2,000 or so. So, assuming they did a decent sample, the confidence interval is even less than a couple of percent in this case. You know that of course - but people who think a few thousand is not a good sample should plug the numbers in some day and become convinced. ---
**Author:** ![Icarus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icarus/32/72_2.png) [@Icarus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icarus)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/43 "2009-03-10T20:02:41Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I’m not speaking for or about **Icarus** , but there are some people of that generation who feel that they accomplished a lot and future generations failed to live up to their example or pick up the torch and run with it. That is part of it. While my example of the sixties generation’s accomplishments may be debated, my overall point is that - while we may witness progress over a period of time, if you stick around long enough you may also witness movement in the opposite direction. Just because something is trending in one direction for a while does not mean it will keep trending in that direction - even in the very long term. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/44 "2009-03-10T20:05:06Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > But that’s how surveys generally work; they poll a representative sample, not an impractically huge number of people. And famous incorrect surveys, like the Literary Digest one, were the result of a bad sample, not an inadequate sample size. The version of the article I read on Yahoo didn’t cite any follow up interviews. It said only 10% of those answering no religion self-identified as atheist or agnostic. This response seems to be different from the generic Christian one. I’d be curious about how many of the 27% who had no religion but were not atheists were deists, were pantheists, or were actually atheists but unwilling to identify themselves as such. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/45 "2009-03-10T20:26:34Z")
> [@New\_Beginning](#): > > Prediction (and I know how ridiculous this sounds to most people): The US will be pretty much dominated by a secular attitude within a generation. The religious era is almost over. Well, back in the 60s and 70s people were talking about how religious belief was dying out. Then came a wave of religiosity in the 80s and 90s and 00s. It was a mistake in the 70s to believe that the current trend against religion would continue uninterrupted, and it is a mistake in the 00s to believe that the current trend towards religion will continue uninterrupted. America has had several waves of religious fervor, and we are currently living through another one: [Great Awakening - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_awakening). But the signs are that this wave is beginning to burn itself out, if I may mix a metaphor. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/46 "2009-03-10T20:30:02Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > Well, back in the 60s and 70s people were talking about how religious belief was dying out. Then came a wave of religiosity in the 80s and 90s and 00s. I don’t think so. What happened was that conservative religious believers – who, for the most part, had traditionally avoided secular politics entirely as an occasion of sin – got angry and got organized and got vocal and got political; but not more numerous. ---
**Author:** ![TooSchoolforCool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tooschoolforcool/32/19621_2.png) [@TooSchoolforCool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TooSchoolforCool)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/47 "2009-03-10T20:37:03Z")
> [@New\_Beginning](#): > > And your comment on US politics is wrong. In Obama’s acceptance speech he specifically referred to non-believers (along with some religions). Of course Obama is no atheist, but this is still a huge change politically for the US (as far as I am aware). This is more an aspect of extremely sloppy, lazy journalism than anything else. President Bush, of all people, mentioned people “of no faith at all” in many of his speeches concerning Americans of good conscience. Obama’s mention was NOT, in fact, a new development in Presidential rhetoric. ---
**Author:** ![Locrian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/locrian/32/14146_2.png) [@Locrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Locrian)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/48 "2009-03-10T20:41:17Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > When polls are done, the issue isn’t just the size, it’s how they are conducted. I’m not a statistics expert, but I think you can definitely get meaningful results with a sample that size out of the U.S. population. > The most important thing is to get a properly randomized sample, not to ask the maximum number of people. (If you did a survey on election day, you’d need to control for age and for voting rates that probably vary among different religious affiliations.) Doing it on college applications would be a bad idea because your answers can be related to financial aid. Then make the participation voluntary for the college applications, or do it on the SATs, again voluntary. How an you get a meaningful result with that random a sample? Did they ask at least 1,000 per state? If so, what areas? Slums? A Church camp? A University? I think that statistics, when it comes to a poll, is never done properly. The questions HAVE to be basic. Like, “Do you believe in a higher power.” Not, “Do you believe in God.” A person’s definition of “god” can be a lot-- christian, loving god, hateful god, Ra, Vishnu, etc. Last year, a poll was given to less than five thousand with the same believe in god question. (Mentioned on this board if I’m not mistaken) There were five answers to check. Yes absolutely, yes maybe, yes it’s possible, no I don’t, and choose not to answer. So, that leaves 3 yeses, 1 no, and 1 N/A. Is that biased? Yep. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Beginning](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/90db22/32.png) [@New\_Beginning](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Beginning)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/49 "2009-03-10T20:47:25Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I’m not speaking for or about **Icarus** , but there are some people of that generation who feel that they accomplished a lot and future generations failed to live up to their example or pick up the torch and run with it. Right, and it’s my contention that it is exactly these people of that old generation that are a huge part of the problem today (even if they were part of the solution back then). They think that the younger generations are useless or totally off track, and they have lost the hope for the future that they once had. Now, the younger generations, seeing what the old did accomplish (and therefore respecting them implicitly even if not explicitly), and hearing the continuously imposing message of “no hope anymore” from them, are left without hope for themselves; they don’t _believe_ in themselves or their ability to effectuate change. After all, that old generation was **great** , and they say it can’t be done anymore. The irony is incredible. “These kids today,” indeed. Remind you of anyone else’s parents? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/50 "2009-03-10T21:02:42Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > America has had several waves of religious fervor, and we are currently living through another one: [Great Awakening - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_awakening). But the signs are that this wave is beginning to burn itself out, if I may mix a metaphor. Actually, according the [Strauss and Howe’s](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss_and_Howe) theory of generational/historical cycles, we’ve already **had** this age’s spiritual/moral “Awakening”; it came back in the 1960s, and was the first such in Anglo-American history not specifically Christian in content (though it did include radical priests and pastors and “Jesus freaks” along with the Asian religions, etc.). ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/51 "2009-03-10T21:20:32Z")
> [@Locrian](#): > > Then make the participation voluntary for the college applications, or do it on the SATs, again voluntary. This does not solve the problem. > [@](#): > > How an you get a meaningful result with that random a sample? Did they ask at least 1,000 per state? If so, what areas? Slums? A Church camp? A University? You should read up on statistics to learn more about how this works. My grades in stats weren’t good and I would probably botch an explanation. The goal is to achieve a random distribution of responders and mimic the population at large. That includes randomizing by geography, by income, and so on. > [@](#): > > The questions HAVE to be basic. Like, “Do you believe in a higher power.” Not, “Do you believe in God.” A person’s definition of “god” can be a lot-- christian, loving god, hateful god, Ra, Vishnu, etc. Why do you think “higher power” is better? Both terms mean different things to different people, and the survey was about religious attitudes: it measures the sizes of different religious faiths, too. If it just lumped all theists and all atheists into one category each, a lot of information would be missing. There’s no way to control for that statistically, which is one of the shortcomings in the survey. > [@](#): > > There were five answers to check. Yes absolutely, yes maybe, yes it’s possible, no I don’t, and choose not to answer. > So, that leaves 3 yeses, 1 no, and 1 N/A. Is that biased? Yep. How many different ways do you need to say “no, I don’t?” I’d have to see the real wording, because “yes, maybe” and “yes, it’s possible” are redundant anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Askance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/askance/32/8281_2.png) [@Askance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askance)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/52 "2009-03-10T21:30:52Z")
> [@New\_Beginning](#): > > And your comment on US politics is wrong. In Obama’s acceptance speech he specifically referred to non-believers (along with some religions). Of course Obama is no atheist, but this is still a huge change politically for the US (as far as I am aware). Certainly atheists are more visible, but what I hadn’t seen any sign of was a rise in (reported) atheism per se of over 80% in less than 20 years, quite remarkable. > [@](#): > > Prediction (and I know how ridiculous this sounds to most people): The US will be pretty much dominated by a secular attitude within a generation. The religious era is almost over. As others have said - I’ve seen it all before, that’s exactly how we felt on the 60s and 70s and it didn’t happen. The only certain thing about trends is that they will _not_ continue in the future as they have in the past. In fact the leveling off after 2001 might be showing this. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/53 "2009-03-10T21:33:34Z")
> [@Askance](#): > > Certainly atheists are more visible, but what I hadn’t seen any sign of was a rise in (reported) atheism per se of over 80% in less than 20 years, quite remarkable. Were you living in the U.S. during this time? That said, I think most of it’s due to people being more comfortable with “committing” to atheism or being more open about it, rather than that many people giving up on theistic religions entirely. Issues with the baby boom generation aside, I agree it’s a bad idea to assume any particular trend is going to continue for decades. ---
**Author:** ![Askance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/askance/32/8281_2.png) [@Askance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askance)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/54 "2009-03-10T21:38:25Z")
> [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](#): > > The Chicago Tribune ran this story yesterday, and I was puzzled that they also spun it as “an increase in secularism”. The percentage of people self-identifying as having no religion increased from 14.2% to 15.0% in seven years. Some increase! Actually it says 14. **1** % to 15%. > [@](#): > > To me, the biggest story would be that the increase during the 1990’s (8% to 14%) all but stopped. I guess that’s why I don’t write newspaper headlines. That’s still a 6.4% increase in only 7 years; much slower than the previous rate of a 72% increase over 11 years, sure, but still remarkable in its own right. ---
**Author:** ![Askance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/askance/32/8281_2.png) [@Askance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askance)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/55 "2009-03-10T21:40:31Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Were you living in the U.S. during this time? Living, no. I have visited the US most years, work in a US-based company and talk to Americans every week. I read US media and pay attention to what’s going on in general. ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/56 "2009-03-10T22:10:28Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > It said only 10% of those answering no religion self-identified as atheist or agnostic. Correct. The question was, “What is your religion, if any?” Most atheists and agnostics, asked that question in that manner, would probably blurt out “none”. As an atheist I know that’s what I would do. A few people did give the “atheist” or “agnostic” answer, and these were lumped together with people who said “none” as “no religion”. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/57 "2009-03-10T22:35:37Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Actually, according the [Strauss and Howe’s](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss_and_Howe) theory of generational/historical cycles, we’ve already **had** this age’s spiritual/moral “Awakening”; it came back in the 1960s, and was the first such in Anglo-American history not specifically Christian in content (though it did include radical priests and pastors and “Jesus freaks” along with the Asian religions, etc.). Right and by their estimation the children of the ‘Millenials’ will be the next spiritual awakening. So basically people who are toddlers now. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Beginning](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/90db22/32.png) [@New\_Beginning](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Beginning)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/58 "2009-03-10T23:05:12Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > That said, I think most of it’s due to people being more comfortable with “committing” to atheism or being more open about it, rather than that many people giving up on theistic religions entirely. A few others in the thread have said similar… Don’t you see a clear connection between openness of atheism and the trend towards secularism? One of the reasons (I admit, not the only) that atheism has not been more widespread in the past is simply because it was not tolerated (originally due to law, and in more recent past due to extreme social pressure). By contrast, the atheists have been coming out of the woodwork all over the place over the past years. Clearly visibility of a belief system (err, a non-belief system) is one component to it gaining members. The fact that people who were _already_ atheists are now much more visible, and the fact that it’s no longer generally acceptable to discriminate against them (relative to past years) suggests that many more will take up atheism or secularism in the future. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/59 "2009-03-10T23:16:19Z")
> [@New\_Beginning](#): > > The fact that people who were _already_ atheists are now much more visible, and the fact that it’s no longer generally acceptable to discriminate against them (relative to past years) suggests that many more will take up atheism or secularism in the future. As nice as that sounds, I don’t think it necessarily follows. It’s possible that everybody might merely convert from intolerant theists to tolerant theists, without making the theological leap to atheism. (And of course it’s possible that everybody wil become fanatical hardline bigoted atheists who will take note of who admitted to being atheists during the tolerant years and have them all shot, to recognize the discussion that these trends are not necessarily as reliable as they initially appear.) ---
**Author:** ![DagNation](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ee7513/32.png) [@DagNation](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DagNation)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2009, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923/60 "2009-03-10T23:36:03Z")
> [@Locrian](#): > > How an you get a meaningful result with that random a sample? The best results come from a truly random sample. Your suggestions would not result in a random sample - College kids, college kids who participate in polls and even high school kids who take the SAT are not a representative sample of their age group, much less of the US population in general. It is important to look at the group polled to determine if it is likely to be a representative group of the larger population. In many cases the pollster takes a random sample of listed phone numbers to call. > [@Locrian](#): > > I think that statistics, when it comes to a poll, is never done properly. I think the statistics are a straight forward mathematical exercise. > [@Locrian](#): > > The questions HAVE to be basic. Like, “Do you believe in a higher power.” Not, “Do you believe in God.” A person’s definition of “god” can be a lot-- christian, loving god, hateful god, Ra, Vishnu, etc. Last year, a poll was given to less than five thousand > with the same believe in god question. (Mentioned on this board if I’m not mistaken) There were five answers to check. Yes absolutely, yes maybe, yes it’s possible, no I don’t, and choose not to answer. > So, that leaves 3 yeses, 1 no, and 1 N/A. Is that biased? Yep. This is a very good point, the phrasing of the questions is the other fudgeable part of a survey - you can ask essentially the same thing in many different ways and come up with very different results. To me, reviewing the questions asked, and how they are phrased is very useful in evaluating if poll results are reliable. MOre information about this in this Wiki article: > **[Opinion poll](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_poll)** > > An opinion poll, often simply referred to as a survey or a poll, is a human research survey of public opinion from a particular sample. Opinion polls are usually designed to represent the opinions of a population by conducting a series of questions and then extrapolating generalities in ratio or within confidence intervals. A person who conducts polls is referred to as a pollster. > The first known example of an opinion poll was a tally of voter preferences reported by the Raleigh Star and North C... > **[Statistics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistics)** > > Statistics (from German: Statistik, orig. "description of a state, a country") is the discipline that concerns the collection, organization, analysis, interpretation, and presentation of data. In applying statistics to a scientific, industrial, or social problem, it is conventional to begin with a statistical population or a statistical model to be studied. Populations can be diverse groups of people or objects such as "all people living in a country" or "every atom composing a crystal". St When ... my favorite line from the second link: > [@](#): > > Harvard President Lawrence Lowell wrote in 1909 that statistics, “…like veal pies, are good if you know the person that made them, and are sure of the ingredients”. Statistically Dag [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secularism-gaining-ground-in-the-us/488923.md?page=4)