The Internet Monk made this chart a while back based on a Pew study. "Nones" sometimes find religion even as other religious people are becoming "Nones":

I guess Jews and muslims would be in the "other" group.

The lines don't line up? Did God just create several million atheists from thin air, just to to confuse people?

Good catch, I have no idea why that is. Here's the link to the explanation of the chart:

http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/michael-bell-looking-at-the-pew-forums-changes-in-religious-affliliation-data

Black Protestant has a similar one at the top, it doesn't show anyone leaving it, but there's some empty space between the start of it and the bunch staying, implying there must be some.

So my bet is that you're right, and they just left that line off by mistake.

for the incoming lines to merge.

Last edited Sun Jan 18, 2015, 07:59 AM - Edit history (2)

... including adult immigrants not represented at the top of the chart.

ETA: From the article:

There's some interesting things going on there, such as for example, the bleeding from Catholic looks really bad, but it's actually not much worse than Evangelical or Mainline. It's just that the conversion TO Catholic is very small, and those groups pick up enough converts to replace them. I also find it interesting how conversion from Evangelical to Mainline or vice-versa is basically a complete wash with each group picking up equal numbers that they lose to the other.

Many None's are socially isolated in the US, I know I am. If I wanted to join a church I can easily think of a couple of dozen around here that I'm aware of and if I actually went out looking I would find a great many more.

On the other hand I've never knowingly met another atheist and have absolutely no idea where I might go to find other atheists. The closest Unitarian church is over forty miles away one way and I'm not at all interested in joining anything called a "church", far too much negative personal history connected with that word for me to be remotely comfortable with that option.

Like the golf course, a great deal of business is done in and around church in the US, I know people who specifically joined right wing megachurches for the captive business clientele it gives, many of those churches actively encourage congregants to do business with each other and discourage them from doing business with non members.

Being in the closet is socially isolating, if atheists in the US weren't often socially isolated there would be no need for billboards like this to exist, billboards that generate strong negative reactions from many Christians.

is pretty extreme. To not know a single other atheist must be really difficult. I know there are communities where the sole outlet for socialization is the church. I wish you could find something, anything, that would provide community for your and the opportunity to be open.

I think you might like the unitarian church. Lots of atheists, agnostics and others attend these churches.

Women have faced similar exclusionary situations for a long time as well. I had to learn how to golf at one point because I was being excluded from the opportunity to do business.

Interestingly, that sign is from an organization in Philadelphia, where I happen to know there is not the kind of prejudice towards atheists that you face.

...over 3 years. It's an interesting and welcoming group of people, with lots of variety and plenty of "outside the box" thinking, which is the only outlook that works for me. The recently retired minister, who had been there for 25 years, is an atheist, which is fascinating.

After 40+ years not participating in any sort of spiritual community, I find the words "going to church" rather stick in my throat and I just can't get comfortable saying them. My usual turn of phrase is "I'm going to the UU service."

My husband was raised Catholic. Hasn't been to a service in decades. His outlook would fit the UU patchwork quilt, and he knows he's welcome to come with me, but hasn't wanted to so far except once to watch our hand bell choir play. I joined that almost as soon as I started going to the services - a fun, new musical adventure for me.

We did not take our sons, now 24 and 22 to any formal religious services while they were growing up, but we did not neglect that side of their development. We (mostly I) talked a lot with them about what it takes to be an upstanding, decent, responsible, open-minded and moral human being. It seems to have taken hold quite well, and we are delighted at the young men they have grown to be.

I will admit that it would be very hard for me if either of them were to end up being any sort of religious fundamentalist.

I ended up calling this approach "home churching" my kids, because, where we live, people look at you funny if you admit that you don't take your children to church, yet everyone understands "home schooling." Not that it is anybody's business, but there were occasions when I felt the need to defend my decision.

managed to get past the abuse of childhood indoctrination.

And yes, that's sarcasm. But the fact that the daughter couldn't come out to her farther suggests that the parents are bigoted and perhaps coercive.

If they weren't, nobody would ever leave home.

I'm not sure you can conclude her parents were bigots anymore than you can conclude anyone who indoctrinates their children in any one religion is bigoted towards all others as well as non-believers.

I know it's hard to believe, but maybe she just really believes.

Her parents believe that being religious is a weakness and an indication that you can't think for yourself. That's pretty bigoted. The same could indeed be said for anyone who thinks that those that hold different religious beliefs or non beliefs are weak and lacking.

I have no doubt she believes in her religion.

I don't think her parents idea is any more bigoted than the widely held religious belief that being godless makes you weaker.

It's pretty ironic that they embrace "free thought" but express dogmatic ideas.

The idea of freethinking is that one can (and should) reject ideas that rely on circular reasoning. There's nothing dogmatic about that.

Their premises about religious people are without merit or basis in fact, so their conclusions are not based on reason or rational thinking.

What I hope is that they will come to understand that being religious is not a weakness. It may not even be a choice. I hope they accept their daughter for who she is and in so doing, become more tolerant of others.

of being a rebellious kid is telling your parents just how and why they're wrong and why your opinions are superior. Apparently this young woman didn't feel safe ito do that, particularly with her father. In that way, there's certainly a parallel with non-believers who feel they can't come out to fundsamentalist family members for fear of losing relationships.

If family can't handle it, what does that say about what's most important to them?

Would be interested to hear of your personal experience with non-believers who feel the way you suggest in your post, and of whatever fallout might have occurred in the wake of their "coming out," so to speak.

Your family, obviously, was more supportive of you than this journalist and her husband were of their daughter.

The fallout for her seems to have been to get as far away from her family as possible. As for other atheists, there are mature adults who post here who say they have never told their parents about their atheism. You might ask them about their experiences.

"Your family, obviously, was more supportive of you than this journalist and her husband were of their daughter."

Where did I say anything about my family's reaction? I merely said I make no secret of it. And what makes you think "support" was called for, unless you consider atheism a "problem" of some sort?


"The fallout for her seems to have been to get as far away from her family as possible. As for other atheists, there are mature adults who post here who say they have never told their parents about their atheism. You might ask them about their experiences."

I was asking you, directly. You must have missed that.

“We have a word in France: libre penseur. Free thinker. Which means you think by yourself. No religion telling you what you think,” Repiton said. “I really thought I had educated my daughter in this way.”

Sounds pretty bigoted and perhaps coercive, yep.

The "free" in "free thinker" only goes so far, apparently.

far with the free thinking. It seems free thinking is like chocolate - a little is good but too much is bad for you.

conform to the notion that the natural numbers arise in their given sequence..."

Show me the difference, please.

Haven't you ever had a theist challenge you to prove no gods exist? You told them it didn't work that way, right?

In a recent exchange, another DUer told me she did not rule out the possibility of their existence. Pretty twisted, if you ask me.

potential to be as coercive and bigoted as strident and fundamentalist theism.

To consider her weak and unable to think for herself is a pretty negative message to send your child. I hope these parents find it in their hearts to recognize that being religious can be a sign of strength, particularly when you are coming from a community that rejects it.

It happens on this site. Repeating the behaviors of those that one has rejected and denounced is a bad thing.

Jewish prayer, said every day when davening:
""Blessed are you, Lord, our God, ruler of the universe who has not created me a woman."

That's my snark reply.

I think there is far more going on in the family dynamics then the article reveals.

One way is to see at as acknowledging that life is not always fair for women and that men have many advantages which make life easier. That is less true than it was 2,000 years ago, but still sadly true throughout the world. When it is no longer true, maybe people will stop saying it.

There is always more going on in the family dynamic than an article reveals, but this story could be told about any family where a child has followed not only a different path, but a path actively rejected by their parents.

"One way is to see at as acknowledging that life is not always fair for women and that men have many advantages which make life easier."

Let's give you a great big fat (borderline-obese) benefit of the doubt here and accept your interpretation as the intended one.

Why would that be any better?

yup

Is the 100% retention of black protestants. Being white, I can't even begin to speculate on that.

As for the color gap, they had to move it over to allow for the new converts.

this is the most telling quote:

“My daughter said, ‘Look at dad. He is a communist; fighting all his life for people, hoping to change world, and he failed,” Repiton said. “I need something else.”

a atheism/religion conflict in the family and more about family history and dynamics.

It says to me this story is more about this family and not only religious choices.

Family dynamics are complex.

But let me ask you this.

If the story was about an fundamentalist family in which a child decided they were atheist, would that be different?

If the quote your reference were this:

If so, maybe. But I think I am focusing more on the rift than her final religious choice.

I think it is interesting that some are saying this is just a rebellious kid, that this has to do more with a dysfunctional family dynamic and that she is still young and may grow out of it.

If it were a child in a religious household, and not even necessarily fundamentalist, and made the decision to leave her religion, there would be applause, I believe.

There would be no remarks that this is just a stage or that the family must have issues or that she will probably mature and return to their religion.

It's the kind of one-sidedness that reflects a smug superiority that atheists are right.

That she will grow out of her religion. Most don't.

We were having a laugh.

My tongue could bleed from the biting when my daughter shares her insights regarding the influence of the stars. Astrology! Really?

We atheists share the human failing that we hope to pass on our own ideas to our offspring. It is still my own hope to bequeath the tools to enable my children to discover the larger truth scattered among all the disparate and random ideas that are running around in our world.

I do commiserate with those who want to believe in something larger than themselves as they come to realize the limits of their own power and influence. I have noticed that those who pray will most often do so because they have come face to face with those limits.

Still, beliefs are fluid, and a 24-year-old is only at the beginning of their spiritual journey, for lack of a better term. The daughters under discussion may well come to their own disbelief in their own time. Or not.

Or a bigot or a fundamentalist or any number of things.

But if they became a believer with whom I shared social and political goals, I would be just great with that.

While all four are non-believers at this time, one married a Muslim, another a catholic and one is about to marry the son of evangelicals. This blending of religions is good for our family, imo. We learn from each other and grow as a result.

You are right, the daughter may come to her own disbelief or may came to another belief. The parents may also change in time and come to believe… or not.

There is no one way.

Some would urge you understand things differently, bless your immortal soul.

I think he would see the gate as very large and the road very wide.

Well, unless you are rich, lol.

No offense taken at all.

As theologies go, Liberation Theology is light years better than Literalism. I do think that we can and should acknowledge that some religious ideas are better than others.

We should be cautious of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I watched Selma last night and it was excellent. Religion plays an important role in the story and it is a thread that is woven into all parts of it.

If people know that story and continue to maintain that religion poisons everything or that religion has never resulted in anything positive, they are blind.

in the civil rights movement of the sixties.

Since those times, I think there has been another contingent who have moved to harness that potential power quite effectively. If the greater Church were not a particularly powerful Special Interest Group, my argument with it would be less strident.

or for bad.

The ability to distinguish and not paint with a board brush is critical. That's that say things like "Religiion poisons everything" are as dangerous that can not see the possible harm that religion does… well, at least not their religion.

"That's that say things like "Religiion poisons everything" are as dangerous that can not see the possible harm that religion does… well, at least not their religion."

As it stands, it's impossible to parse.