Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Religious Nones: The bigger picture shows increasing polarization

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

On recent Sundays, we’ve been pointing to discussions of the rise of the Religious Nones (people who say they have no religion) – and what that means and doesn’t mean. (Here and here, for example).

It doesn’t mean that former theists have become atheists or even that they are likely to. The driving factor is the collapse of mainline Protestantism, leaving people who are vaguely theist without a religious identity. Many questions lie beyond that change but first, a note about identity…

The Catholic Church is in big trouble too. But the nature of the problem is a bit different. “Catholic” is a multigenerational identity. People can think of themselves as Catholic even if no one since their grandparents’ day has ever been to mass. Put another way: They don’t think they’re atheists (that’s scary). They just continue to say they are Catholic—even if they can’t recite the Lord’s Prayer. No one challenges them on the point. Why bother? One suspects it’s roughly similar with Islam in the Middle East.

By contrast, let’s say that no one in your family has darkened the door of a mainline liberal church since your grandmother did, occasonally, in the 1960s. You probably won’t think of yourself as a member. Truth be told, such a church never had much impact on the culture around it. In recent decades, it probably became largely indistinguishable from the surrounding culture from which it got all its ideas. Its disappearance would have little cultural impact.

The rise of the Nones does mean something important, however: Those who care about the Big Questions are more visibly polarized:

Consider, for example, the percentage of Americans who report that their religious affiliation is “Strong.” This percentage has fluctuated a bit over the decades, but the most recent survey puts it at 34 percent, a number that has remained basically unchanged since 1975, when 35 percent of Americans reported a strong religious affiliation. Apparently, the rise of the Nones is not attributable to a decline in religious enthusiasm among the most strongly committed.

By contrast, the decline in the percentage of Americans who say their religious affiliation is only “Somewhat strong” appears steadier, particularly in recent years. In 2006, about 12 percent of Americans told the GSS surveyors that their affiliation was “Somewhat Strong.” In the most recent survey, that percentage has fallen to only 4 percent. That is a significant drop… Confirmation bias is always a problem when one looks at data like this. Still, the 2018 report suggests that Americans are becoming deeply divided in our attitudes toward religion, a subject about which I’ve written elsewhere. Mark Movsesian, “The Devout and the Nones” at First Things

Movsesian goes on to explain that the divide leaves a deeper mark now on American politics, with Religious Nones being the largest group in the Democratic Party (30%) and 70% of declared Republicans believing in the “God of the Bible.” The “religious left,” incidentally, now seems to be largely an artifact of thinkmags, although it was an important force decades ago.

Visible polarization enables issues to become more politicized than they otherwise could be.

Whatever happens with science issues as a result won’t be dull.

See also: Researchers: Rise In “Religious Nones” Masks Growth In Evangelicalism

and

For The First Time, “No Religion” Is The Most Popular Choice For Americans

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments
DS, wrong question. The question that gives me nightmares and day stallions is, will the US survive the current tidal waves and moral collapse, along with Britain, France and Germany? As for the little archipelago to the south, who knows? KF PS: Do you not see how gender mania is leading to disintegration of even personal identity, much less family and community order?kairosfocus
May 14, 2019
May
05
May
14
14
2019
08:52 AM
8
08
52
AM
PDT
DS, I think last days fatalism is an error. On reading my Bible, at Pentecost, Peter spoke of "in these last days" as we also see in Heb 1. Messiah is eschatological, and arguably the frame extends to Jeremiah and Daniel: 2,600 years so far, the time when God goes global, then as gospel goes, revival meets resistance by riot. And riot is very bad governance in any of the nations that are created by and accountable to God. Where, God is creator of the nations and the gospel has an intrinsic ethical component which is part of how it teaches the nations. Including as we can see in Alfred's Book of Dooms and in Justinian's Corpus Juris Civilis (in its embedded textbook, the Institutes) -- not perfect, but instructive. So, too, the parables of the stewards found wanting should serve as warning enough that we must not be found idle or refusing to teach the nations i/l/o Messiah. Where, Gal 3:14 is clear that in the seed of Abraham, the blessing of Abraham is come to any nation that will but receive it. So, the current guilty secret of our civilisation is a bad sign, and it is tied to the Rom 1 collapse of ethics and good order that marks communities in stubborn rebellion against what they know or should acknowledge concerning their Creator. I can find no justification whatsoever for enabling error by silence; especially ruinous error. The lesson of the White Rose movement on how the idolatry of political messianism works ruin should also be noted. I think too that Schaeffer's thought on the line of despair has somewhat to teach. DV, more later, today, I handed over a draft. KFkairosfocus
May 14, 2019
May
05
May
14
14
2019
08:49 AM
8
08
49
AM
PDT
KF, Do you believe that same-sex marriage will ever be illegal anywhere in the US again?daveS
May 14, 2019
May
05
May
14
14
2019
07:08 AM
7
07
08
AM
PDT
BB, it is clear that disintegration has set in, but as the initial breakdowns are what you want (notice the deeply flawed positivist view of law . . . a warning sign!) you do not see the cliff's edge.That reminds me of the recent court decision applauded by many that because they get what they wish they do not see the deadly danger of the notion that a judge can unilaterally rewrite a constitution from his bench. KFkairosfocus
May 14, 2019
May
05
May
14
14
2019
06:42 AM
6
06
42
AM
PDT
KF,
We are in a moral hazard race towards a cliff-edge and need strong alternative leadership to call us to turn back before the edge crumbles underfoot. I am not prepared to bet on prudence saving the day; that’s why I think we are in for a wild ride over a cliff’s edge with a very hard, painful awakening as we hit rock bottom.
Several of my Christian friends (and my wife) also think similarly, but are not especially worried---that's just how the Great Tribulation is going to be. It will be followed by the Second Coming anyway. All this is supposed to happen in the not-too-distant future, perhaps even within our lifetimes. On the other hand, I, like you, am concerned about threats that various issues (energy, fresh water etc.) present to our Earthly existence. I'm not particularly worried about otherwise well-behaved couples rubbing "wrong" bodyparts together.daveS
May 14, 2019
May
05
May
14
14
2019
04:59 AM
4
04
59
AM
PDT
KF
Playing carelessly and heedlessly with fire is liable to set off a conflagration that no one can control, costing losses that we cannot afford.
Yet same sex marriage has been the law in many jurisdictions for almost 15 years and none of the earned dire consequences have come to pass.
Singling out like you did on a factor (skin colour and associated racial features) that is in itself irrelevant to a morally governed behaviour is completely another and is at best ill advised.
Then why were you not as vociferous in your objection when the same argument was used because some homosexuals are promiscuous. The argument is either fallacious for all or for none.Brother Brian
May 14, 2019
May
05
May
14
14
2019
04:55 AM
4
04
55
AM
PDT
PS: Let us not overlook the guilty secret factor:
the guilty secret at the heart of today’s hyperskepticism toward, dismissal of, apostasy from and hostility against the historic Christian faith: the evidence that warrants that faith is not only credible but strong. (I add: especially, once blatant question-begging through anti-supernaturalistic prejudice is off the table.
kairosfocus
May 14, 2019
May
05
May
14
14
2019
03:27 AM
3
03
27
AM
PDT
F/N2: There is indeed a high rate of promiscuity, adultery and other forms sexually immoral behaviour. That in itself is a strong sign of how much trouble our civilisation is in. This sort of behaviour has also been known (since at least Augustine, on record) as warping one's moral sense; that is already a pointer to one reason for widespread spiritual break down as warned against in Eph 4:17 - 24 ff. What we need is a reformation, but until people are convinced the alternative is ruin, that is not likely. We are in a moral hazard race towards a cliff-edge and need strong alternative leadership to call us to turn back before the edge crumbles underfoot. I am not prepared to bet on prudence saving the day; that's why I think we are in for a wild ride over a cliff's edge with a very hard, painful awakening as we hit rock bottom. An awakening that comes at a cost we can ill afford. KFkairosfocus
May 14, 2019
May
05
May
14
14
2019
02:57 AM
2
02
57
AM
PDT
F/N: Plato's warning, 2360 years ago:
Ath [in The Laws, Bk X 2,350+ ya]. . . .[The avant garde philosophers and poets, c. 360 BC] say that fire and water, and earth and air [i.e the classical "material" elements of the cosmos], all exist by nature and chance, and none of them by art . . . [such that] all that is in the heaven, as well as animals and all plants, and all the seasons come from these elements, not by the action of mind, as they say, or of any God, or from art, but as I was saying, by nature and chance only [ --> that is, evolutionary materialism is ancient and would trace all things to blind chance and mechanical necessity] . . . . [Thus, they hold] that the principles of justice have no existence at all in nature, but that mankind are always disputing about them and altering them; and that the alterations which are made by art and by law have no basis in nature, but are of authority for the moment and at the time at which they are made.-
[ --> Relativism, too, is not new; complete with its radical amorality rooted in a worldview that has no foundational IS that can ground OUGHT, leading to an effectively arbitrary foundation only for morality, ethics and law: accident of personal preference, the ebbs and flows of power politics, accidents of history and and the shifting sands of manipulated community opinion driven by "winds and waves of doctrine and the cunning craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming . . . " cf a video on Plato's parable of the cave; from the perspective of pondering who set up the manipulative shadow-shows, why.]
These, my friends, are the sayings of wise men, poets and prose writers, which find a way into the minds of youth. They are told by them that the highest right is might,
[ --> Evolutionary materialism -- having no IS that can properly ground OUGHT -- leads to the promotion of amorality on which the only basis for "OUGHT" is seen to be might (and manipulation: might in "spin") . . . ]
and in this way the young fall into impieties, under the idea that the Gods are not such as the law bids them imagine; and hence arise factions [ --> Evolutionary materialism-motivated amorality "naturally" leads to continual contentions and power struggles influenced by that amorality at the hands of ruthless power hungry nihilistic agendas], these philosophers inviting them to lead a true life according to nature, that is,to live in real dominion over others [ --> such amoral and/or nihilistic factions, if they gain power, "naturally" tend towards ruthless abuse and arbitrariness . . . they have not learned the habits nor accepted the principles of mutual respect, justice, fairness and keeping the civil peace of justice, so they will want to deceive, manipulate and crush -- as the consistent history of radical revolutions over the past 250 years so plainly shows again and again], and not in legal subjection to them [--> nihilistic will to power not the spirit of justice and lawfulness].
We ignore this at our peril. KFkairosfocus
May 13, 2019
May
05
May
13
13
2019
10:37 PM
10
10
37
PM
PDT
BB, it is an implication of self-refuting evolutionary materialism, that the only possible laws are the ones we make up. It is also an implication of the same philosophy that our being morally governed and being able to actually reason are delusions. And in that context law and justice reduce to might makes 'right.' The whole scheme thus falsifies itself as well as exposing itself as anti-civilisational, ruinous nihilism. So, we must turn instead to a world framework that has room for a rational life governed by duties of care to truth, right reason, prudence and justice. In that context, as Cicero long since pointed out, law is highest reason, concerning the just and prudent, so what we ought to or ought not to do. Within such a framework, marriage is part of the law of our nature, reflecting the existence and complementarity of the two sexes as well as relationship stability for sound child nurture. It is not an arbitrary contractual arrangement that whoever grabs power can do with it what he or she wants. But then, the mutineers think they can do as they p[lease on Plato's ship of state, never mind ruinous consequences. Playing carelessly and heedlessly with fire is liable to set off a conflagration that no one can control, costing losses that we cannot afford. That's why a sound civilisation does not cede power to nihilists and their absurd ideologies. Unfortunately, the soundness of our civilisation is very much in doubt at this stage. KF PS: You have also chosen to double down on a largely irrelevant, racially loaded claim, showing a tin ear. If you had said widespread promiscuity, that would be one thing. Singling out like you did on a factor (skin colour and associated racial features) that is in itself irrelevant to a morally governed behaviour is completely another and is at best ill advised.kairosfocus
May 13, 2019
May
05
May
13
13
2019
10:34 PM
10
10
34
PM
PDT
KF
Marriage is part of our genetically stamped law of nature and no magic words under colour of law can change what ‘ent into what is. Despite any sez who fallacies to the contrary.
No, marriage is a human/society made institution. At various times it has been different things. Society is well within its rights to decide what marriage is.
PS: I note your racially loaded, ill-advised comment in passing.
There was nothing ill-advised about it. I pointed out the fact that an identifiable group in the US (African Americans) have promiscuity/STD rates more than double that of other races because the suggestion was being made that marriage should be denied another identifiable group because of higher rates of promiscuity/STDs. If marriage should be restricted due to high promiscuity/STD rates of an identifiable group, it should apply to all groups with high promiscuity/STD rates.Brother Brian
May 13, 2019
May
05
May
13
13
2019
05:35 PM
5
05
35
PM
PDT
BB, I just saw the latest from you. FYI, the evidence is the setting up of a "marriage" under colour of law does not stop the promiscuity; this is of course reflective of the underlying transgressivity involved. More to the point, you cannot declare the tail of a sheep is a leg and announce by word magic, it has five legs. Marriage is part of our genetically stamped law of nature and no magic words under colour of law can change what 'ent into what is. Despite any sez who fallacies to the contrary. The fundamental crooked yardstick here, is the notion that by word magic, we make law as we please. Nope, that's nihilism, whether of a judge or a panel or a parliament or a referendum makes no difference. Worse, in this context, the nihilism imposes what, in strict terms, is sacrilegious blasphemy and demands that people warp conscience to approve of wrong under colour of being right. That is trying to undo the 1648 Westphalia settlements that lie behind key freedom of conscience and expression provisions in bills of rights. That, predictably, on long, sad, bloody history, will not end well. Going further, it is part of an agenda with no limit that is disrupting identity, implications of biology, societal provisions that protect women in the public and many more things. These things will not end well. But then, whoever said that prudence was a natural state of a democratic polity that is prone to the Plato style mutiny on the ship of state? KF PS: I note your racially loaded, ill-advised comment in passing.kairosfocus
May 13, 2019
May
05
May
13
13
2019
03:38 PM
3
03
38
PM
PDT
I would like to scroll back to something someone said up-thread but I don’t recall the name, and I don’t have enough time to shear her for it. It had to do with homosexual promiscuity and using it as one of the arguments against same sex marriage. I assume the argument is that because of higher promiscuity, homosexuals would be incapable of being monogamous. However, using the same rationale, we should be taking steps to prevent blacks from marrying. After all, STD rates among blacks are much higher than other races.Brother Brian
May 12, 2019
May
05
May
12
12
2019
07:02 AM
7
07
02
AM
PDT
8th Place: A High School Girl’s Life After Transgender Students Join Her Sport ,,, A junior, Selina missed qualifying for the 55-meter in the New England regionals by two spots. Two spots, she said, that were taken by biological boys. Had the boys who identify as girls not been allowed to compete, Selina would have placed sixth, qualifying to run the 55 in front of college coaches at the New England regionals. Instead, she placed eighth, watching the 55 from the sidelines after qualifying in only the long jump, an event in which the transgender athletes didn’t compete.,,, https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/05/06/8th-place-high-school-girls-speak-out-on-getting-beat-by-biological-boys/
Why aren't all the women's rights people on the left up in arms about stuff like this?bornagain77
May 11, 2019
May
05
May
11
11
2019
04:28 PM
4
04
28
PM
PDT
A Pediatrician Explains How ‘Dangerous’ Equality Act Would Force Doctors to ‘Do Harm’ - May 10, 2019 Excerpt: Doctors who are uncomfortable prescribing hormone treatments or doing gender reassignment surgeries could soon potentially be in violation of federal law, warns Dr. Michelle Cretella, a pediatrician and executive director of the American College of Pediatricians. And they’re not the only ones at risk: Parents, too, could find themselves unable to decide on their own child’s medical treatment. Read our interview with Cretella, posted below, or listen to it on the podcast: https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/05/10/a-pediatrician-explains-how-dangerous-equality-act-would-force-doctors-to-do-harm/?
bornagain77
May 11, 2019
May
05
May
11
11
2019
01:35 PM
1
01
35
PM
PDT
Someone is ignoring the obvious mental illness of transgenders living in denial of biological reality, (which is a mental illness that Darwinists themselves also happen to suffer from),
In the psychology of human behavior, denialism is a person's choice to deny reality as a way to avoid a psychologically uncomfortable truth. Denialism - Wikipedia
Denying reality is also commonly referred to as being delusional. Insisting that laws be enacted to make the transgender's denial of reality a 'right' in which the transgender can, by force of law, upset social norms for the vast majority of the population, (such as male and female locker rooms, 'males' playing female sports, male and female bathrooms etc.. etc..), is a call for widespread "social psychosis" . Here is a deeper look at the 'real' mental illness behind transgenders:
The Transgender Movement and 'Gender Identity' in the Law By Peter Sprigg Senior Fellow for Policy Studies Virtually all people have a biological sex, identifiable at birth and immutable through life, which makes them either male or female. The transgender movement represents a denial of this physical reality. A Mental Disorder The belief that one is, or the desire to be, of a different “gender identity” from one’s biological sex has long been recognized as a mental disorder.[i] Psychiatrist Sander Breiner declares, “[W]hen an adult who is normal in appearance and functioning believes there is something ugly or defective in their appearance . . . there is a psychological problem.”[ii] Another psychiatrist, Rick Fitzgibbons, calls it “a fixed false belief . . . specifically a delusion.”[iii] Psychiatrist Paul McHugh declares, “It is a disorder of the mind. Not a disorder of the body.”[iv] Those who choose not to live with the “gender identity” that corresponds to their biological sex are known as “transgender” persons. (Note: The tiny number of persons who are “intersexed”—born with a mix of male and female genetic or biological characteristics—are in a separate category and are not considered “transgender.”[v]) After extensive lobbying by transgender activists, the American Psychiatric Association changed the diagnosis of “Gender Identity Disorder” to “Gender Dysphoria” in 2013. It remains on the list of disorders, though, because, “To get insurance coverage for the medical treatments, individuals need a diagnosis.”[vi] Causes and Treatment of “Gender Dysphoria” While causality is difficult to determine, those who identify as transgender are more likely to have been victims of child sexual abuse or to have a history of trauma, loss, and family disruption.[vii] Susan Bradley, M.D. and Kenneth J. Zucker of the University of Toronto, leading experts in gender dysphoria in children, have declared that “clinicians should be optimistic, not nihilistic, about the possibility of helping the children to become more secure in their gender identity.”[viii] Psychiatrists have reported that gender dysphoria often occurs with other mental health problems in adults, and that it “improved in parallel during treatment” for those conditions.[ix] “Gender Reassignment” Surgery Full transition involves hormone treatments, breast surgery (removal or implants), other cosmetic surgery, genital reconstruction, and a change of personal identification. However, not every person seeking to live as the other sex will undergo surgery.[x] These surgical procedures are not always successful and can be extremely painful.[xi] A lifetime of hormone treatments can also have profound physical and psychological consequences.[xii] Psychiatrist Jon Meyer concluded that “surgery is not a proper treatment for a psychiatric disorder and it is clear to me that these patients have severe psychological problems that do not go away following surgery.”[xiii] High rates of suicide exist even among those who have already received gender reassignment surgery, which suggests that suicidal tendencies result from an underlying pathology.[xiv] https://www.frc.org/transgenderidentity Click here to read the entire paper https://downloads.frc.org/EF/EF16B28.pdf
bornagain77
May 11, 2019
May
05
May
11
11
2019
12:48 PM
12
12
48
PM
PDT
AaronS1978@256, I agree that children should not be given hormones or surgery for the purpose of transgenering. We don’t allow them to drive, drink or vote because they are not emotionally or physically developed enough to handle it. However, once they reach the age of majority, and want to transgender, go for it. I have personal experience with this issue. A young man in my office entered my office and informed me that he was going to start hormone treatments for the purpose of transgendering. In the two years since she announced this, her absenteeism has declined, her productivity has increased and her coworkers, with the exception of one, have all been supportive. I fired the exception and I have no regrets over doing so. With regard to the two lists the reason I mention their tax free status was to explain that the 30+ flavors of Christianity are recognized by the policy makers. I didn’t intend to infer that it was actually about the tax free status. My apologies. The reason I justaposed my list with KF’s was to demonstrate the inanity of his inference that policy makers anywhere were taking this list seriously. I could have used any list of government recognized organizations of similar nature (eg, amateur sports associations) but I used Christian sects/denominations as I felt it was apprise given KF’s claims.Brother Brian
May 11, 2019
May
05
May
11
11
2019
08:47 AM
8
08
47
AM
PDT
F/N 2: Continuing . . . We may now set out to frame how that natural moral law may be drawn out, by using a first principles approach, for instance:
1] The first self evident moral truth is that we are inescapably under the government of ought. (This is manifest in even an objector's implication in the questions, challenges and arguments that s/he would advance, that we are in the wrong and there is something to be avoided about that. That is, even the objector inadvertently implies that we OUGHT to do, think, aim for and say the right. Not even the hyperskeptical objector can escape this truth. Patent absurdity on attempted denial.) 2] Second self evident truth, we discern that some things are right and others are wrong by a compass-sense we term conscience which guides our thought. (Again, objectors depend on a sense of guilt/ urgency to be right not wrong on our part to give their points persuasive force. See what would be undermined should conscience be deadened or dismissed universally? Sawing off the branch on which we all must sit.) 3] Third, were this sense of conscience and linked sense that we can make responsibly free, rational decisions to be a delusion, we would at once descend into a status of grand delusion in which there is no good ground for confidence in our self-understanding. (That is, we look at an infinite regress of Plato’s cave worlds: once such a principle of grand global delusion is injected, there is no firewall so the perception of level one delusion is subject to the same issue, and this level two perception too, ad infinitum; landing in patent absurdity.) 4] Fourth, we are objectively under obligation of OUGHT. That is, despite any particular person’s (or group’s or august council’s or majority’s) wishes or claims to the contrary, such obligation credibly holds to moral certainty. That is, it would be irresponsible, foolish and unwise for us to act and try to live otherwise. 5] Fifth, this cumulative framework of moral government under OUGHT is the basis for the manifest core principles of the natural moral law under which we find ourselves obligated to the right the good, the true etc. Where also, patently, we struggle to live up to what we acknowledge or imply we ought to do. 6] Sixth, this means we live in a world in which being under core, generally understood principles of natural moral law is coherent and factually adequate, thus calling for a world-understanding in which OUGHT is properly grounded at root level. (Thus worldviews that can soundly meet this test are the only truly viable ones. If a worldview does not have in it a world-root level IS that can simultaneously ground OUGHT -- so that IS and OUGHT are inextricably fused at that level, it fails decisively.*) 7] Seventh, in light of the above, even the weakest and most voiceless of us thus has a natural right to life, liberty, the pursuit of fulfillment of one’s sense of what s/he ought to be (“happiness”). This includes the young child, the unborn and more. (We see here the concept that rights are binding moral expectations of others to provide respect in regards to us because of our inherent status as human beings, members of the community of valuable neighbours. Where also who is my neighbour was forever answered by the parable of the Good Samaritan. Likewise, there can be no right to demand of or compel my neighbour that s/he upholds me and enables me in the wrong — including under false colour of law through lawfare; usurping the sword of justice to impose a ruthless policy agenda in fundamental breach of that civil peace which must ever pivot on manifest justice. To justly claim a right, one must first be in the right.) 8] Eighth, like unto the seventh, such may only be circumscribed or limited for good cause. Such as, reciprocal obligation to cherish and not harm neighbour of equal, equally valuable nature in community and in the wider world of the common brotherhood of humanity. 9] Ninth, this is the context in which it becomes self evidently wrong, wicked and evil to kidnap, sexually torture and murder a young child or the like as concrete cases in point that show that might and/or manipulation do not make ‘right,’ ‘truth,’ ‘worth,’ ‘justice,’ ‘fairness,’ ‘law’ etc. That is, anything that expresses or implies the nihilist’s credo is morally absurd. 10] Tenth, this entails that in civil society with government, justice is a principal task of legitimate government. In short, nihilistic will to power untempered by the primacy of justice is its own refutation in any type of state. Where, justice is the due balance of rights, freedoms and responsibilities. (In Aristotle's terms as cited by Hooker: "because we would take no harm, we must therefore do none; That since we would not be in any thing extremely dealt with, we must ourselves avoid all extremity in our dealings; That from all violence and wrong we are utterly to abstain, with such-like .") Thus also, 11] Eleventh, that government is and ought to be subject to audit, reformation and if necessary replacement should it fail sufficiently badly and incorrigibly. (NB: This is a requisite of accountability for justice, and the suggestion or implication of some views across time, that government can reasonably be unaccountable to the governed, is its own refutation, reflecting -- again -- nihilistic will to power; which is automatically absurd. This truth involves the issue that finite, fallible, morally struggling men acting as civil authorities in the face of changing times and situations as well as in the face of the tendency of power to corrupt, need to be open to remonstrance and reformation -- or if they become resistant to reasonable appeal, there must be effective means of replacement. Hence, the principle that the general election is an insitutionalised regular solemn assembly of the people for audit and reform or if needs be replacement of government gone bad. But this is by no means an endorsement of the notion that a manipulated mob bent on a march of folly has a right to do as it pleases.) 12] Twelfth, the attempt to deny or dismiss such a general framework of moral governance invariably lands in shipwreck of incoherence and absurdity. As, has been seen in outline. But that does not mean that the attempt is not going to be made, so there is a mutual obligation of frank and fair correction and restraint of evil. _______________ * F/N: After centuries of debates and assessment of alternatives per comparative difficulties, there is in fact just one serious candidate to be such a grounding IS: the inherently good creator God, a necessary and maximally great being worthy of ultimate loyalty and the reasonable responsible service of doing the good in accord with our manifestly evident nature. (And instantly, such generic ethical theism answers also to the accusation oh this is “religion”; that term being used as a dirty word — no, this is philosophy. If you doubt this, simply put forth a different candidate that meets the required criteria and passes the comparative difficulties test: _________ . Likewise, an inherently good, maximally great being will not be arbitrary or deceitful etc, that is why such is fully worthy of ultimate loyalty and the reasonable, responsible service of doing the good in accord with our manifestly evident nature. As a serious candidate necessary being, such would be eternal and embedded in the frame for a world to exist at all. Thus such a candidate is either impossible as a square circle is impossible due to mutual ruin of core characteristics, or else it is actual. For simple instance no world is possible without two-ness in it, a necessary basis for distinct identity inter alia.
So, we can see how a stable community can be built, framed on responsible, reasonable principles, many of them manifestations of the sort of natural law that Cicero and many others have discussed. In this framework, responsible government may then extend through civil law framed on justice and good community order. KFkairosfocus
May 11, 2019
May
05
May
11
11
2019
03:18 AM
3
03
18
AM
PDT
F/N: Refocussing. On the table is a warrant regarding the core gospel message, which is foundational to the civilisation which has come down to us.In effect, the Christian synthesis of the heritage of Jerusalem, Athens and Rome framed what became Christendom and has come down to us today, now usually styled Western Civilisation. The just linked also discusses through Schaeffer's framework, how for hundreds of years, there has been a growing push in thought, culture and general society to split apart "grace and nature" or reason and revelation, leading to a breakdown of the unifying core in both worldviews and cultural agendas. This reflects the classic problem of the one and the many. In our time,the OP notes that there has been a longstanding push of dechristianisation and radical secularisation, culminating in a situation where, if one lists Christians by denom, "none" now comes out at the top of the list, alongside Catholicism and Evangelicalism. As a previous OP noted:
“‘Religious nones’ as they are called by researchers, are a diverse group made up of atheists, agnostics, the spiritual, and those who are no specific organized religion in particular. A rejection of organized religion is the common thread they share,” CNN reports. “It is the first time we have seen this. The same questions have been asked for 44 years,” political scientist and Baptist pastor Ryan Burge told CNN. Timothy Meads, “ICYMI: ‘No Religion’ Now As Popular As Catholicism, Evangelicalism” at Townhall
Of course, this is a grab-bag category and a bit of an anomaly as a result. However, it does surface serious questions on how we form our worldviews and how we respond to readily accessible -- but increasingly marginalised and often disdained -- evidence that the gospel core of the Christian faith (thus the integral gospel ethics of turning from a sinful lifestyle through repentance) is actually strongly warranted. In turn, this is driven by the consideration that our thought-life is under moral government i/l/o duties to truth, right reason (thus warrant), prudence, justice etc. So, in part, the study tracks the degree to which many have been led to doubt or dismiss that warrant, in the teeth of its actual strength. Which, is not a healthy sign for the state of our civilisation (not to mention, our souls). That's why the already linked has in it a provocative remark, i/l/o the significance of serious explanatory alternatives given the twelve minimal facts about Jesus of Nazareth:
This, then, is the guilty secret at the heart of today’s hyperskepticism toward, dismissal of, apostasy from and hostility against the historic Christian faith: the evidence that warrants that faith is not only credible but strong. (I add: especially, once blatant question-begging through anti-supernaturalistic prejudice is off the table . . .
We need to soberly deal with this matter. It is time for a fresh conversation, including on how the logic of being points to a necessary being world root, and how our existence as morally governed creatures leads to the need for a root of reality capable of grounding ought. Where, there is precisely one serious candidate . . . if you think not, kindly provide an alternative: ________ and warrant on comparative difficulties: ________. (Much harder to do than to dismiss rhetorically or studiously ignore.) Namely, the inherently good, utterly wise creator God, a necessary and maximally great being. One, worthy of our loyalty and of the responsible, reasonable service of doing the good that accords with our manifest nature. This last, pointing to the significance of the natural moral law that is attested by functional consciences. In this context, we can see the significance of Cicero's observation in de Legibus, c. 50 BC:
—Marcus [in de Legibus, introductory remarks,. C1 BC]: . . . the subject of our present discussion . . . comprehends the universal principles of equity and law. In such a discussion therefore on the great moral law of nature, the practice of the civil law can occupy but an insignificant and subordinate station. For according to our idea, we shall have to explain the true nature of moral justice, which is congenial and correspondent [36]with the true nature of man. We shall have to examine those principles of legislation by which all political states should be governed. And last of all, shall we have to speak of those laws and customs which are framed for the use and convenience of particular peoples, which regulate the civic and municipal affairs of the citizens, and which are known by the title of civil laws. Quintus [his real-life brother]. —You take a noble view of the subject, my brother, and go to the fountain–head of moral truth, in order to throw light on the whole science of jurisprudence: while those who confine their legal studies to the civil law too often grow less familiar with the arts of justice than with those of litigation. Marcus. —Your observation, my Quintus, is not quite correct. It is not so much the science of law that produces litigation, as the ignorance of it, (potius ignoratio juris litigiosa est quam scientia) . . . . With respect to the true principle of justice, many learned men have maintained that it springs from Law. I hardly know if their opinion be not correct, at least, according to their own definition; for “Law (say they) is the highest reason, implanted in nature, which prescribes those things which ought to be done, and forbids the contrary.” This, they think, is apparent from the converse of the proposition; because this same reason, when it [37]is confirmed and established in men’s minds, is the law of all their actions. They therefore conceive that the voice of conscience is a law, that moral prudence is a law, whose operation is to urge us to good actions, and restrain us from evil ones. They think, too, that the Greek name for law (NOMOS), which is derived from NEMO, to distribute, implies the very nature of the thing, that is, to give every man his due. [--> this implies a definition of justice as the due balance of rights, freedoms and responsibilities] For my part, I imagine that the moral essence of law is better expressed by its Latin name, (lex), which conveys the idea of selection or discrimination. According to the Greeks, therefore, the name of law implies an equitable distribution of goods: according to the Romans, an equitable discrimination between good and evil. The true definition of law should, however, include both these characteristics. And this being granted as an almost self–evident proposition, the origin of justice is to be sought in the divine law of eternal and immutable morality. This indeed is the true energy of nature, the very soul and essence of wisdom, the test of virtue and vice.
It is time for a fresh, sober-minded conversation. KFkairosfocus
May 11, 2019
May
05
May
11
11
2019
02:30 AM
2
02
30
AM
PDT
AS & BA 77, indeed, there is a serious problem, one that has unfortunately led to distortions of society and to what can only be rightly termed medical malpractice. KFkairosfocus
May 11, 2019
May
05
May
11
11
2019
01:12 AM
1
01
12
AM
PDT
BB, you simply do not know the facts but decide to dismiss as if you are master of facts. Then you insist on a false analogy already corrected, again ignoring material facts on the table. That ends the subject, demonstrating the root problem. KFkairosfocus
May 11, 2019
May
05
May
11
11
2019
01:07 AM
1
01
07
AM
PDT
Wow I went back to that thread to see that it was at 253 comments all of which is just bickering I don’t even know where to begin with this I would just say close the thread, Like I am trying to formulate some kind of comment that hasn’t already been said Like degrading families because we have to be mindful of a mental disorder that transgender people actually do have, Point in case that television show on TLC (Can’t remember the title of the show but it was the boys’ name) about a boy that wanted to become a girl but he was 9 or 12 (can’t remember) and his parents were pretty much forced into agreeing with his decision. This is absurd it should be the other way around that child doesn’t know what he wants to be at that point and things can definitely change once you hit puberty. Having such a controversial surgery or hormonal treatment at such a young age is ridiculous but it’s allowed now!  That’s wrong there’s no reason to ruin a family or bend to something that’s only been really prevalent over the past 10 years, and to be honest with you really only since Bruce Jenner apparently came out and said I’m definitely a transgender, which blew the roof off of everything, to the point that South Park has made fun of it, Just a couple years ago I saw something on YouTube making fun of the 740 different types of gender identification. The video was pulled Because it was offensive. And I know that this is existed for longer than just 10 years it didn’t just spontaneously come into existence I get this, But it’s only been in the past 10 years that it became super prevalent. A recent study came out showing that there is a high rate of mental disorders in the LBGT community, Yet nobody wants to address this because it might offend the people with mental disorders. If there something wrong with them we need to help them but we can’t help them because, well, we will offend them BB77 Already posted multi studies about that and They are promptly ignored. Lastly the two list that were provided one is just a list of religions ( Christianity and it’s different flavors of vanilla) And the transgender community. So I see the parallel, The,”check this out, all of these religions have identities that are different from one another. But that’s it it’s just a parallel it’s like connecting dots. The other issue I have with that is pointing out that religions have tax exempt status many organizations have tax exempt status, I work at a bank I see it all the time not just religions. Hell individuals can file for tax exempt status if they meet the proper requirements. So it’s hard for me to see why repeatedly bringing up that religions have tax exempt status has anything to do with this short of trying to demonize them and insinuate that they’re bad people because transgender don’t have tax exempt status, but Christianity that supposedly has an identity crisis just like transgender, does. This is an asking for an explanation this is insinuating an insult Now The religions in question have affectively the exact same core belief “believe in Jesus son of God”. Secondly, the reason for the different divisions had nothing to do with identity crisis. The primary schism happened with Catholicism and Protestantism over behaviors that were being taken with in the church that we’re not exactly kosher. This schism gave birth to all the different Christianity as you see today, short of a few. Mormons are kind of off but all the other religions pretty much have the same core belief On the flipside, the apparently fraudulent or stupid list provided by ABC news (which at that point if they are trash we should discard every other three letter news station such as CNN and NBC) Is a list of people with possible psychological disorders that to be honest with you, need help, more than a lot of people can provide. I am sure the smart ass comment will be used here so I’ll just get this out there right now because that seems to be the attitude of this thread, “I would consider religious people crazy too” But that seems to be the attitude of this thread it’s not really about discussing anything it’s about discrediting people and insulting.AaronS1978
May 11, 2019
May
05
May
11
11
2019
12:17 AM
12
12
17
AM
PDT
To add credence to the claim that the transgender issue is first and foremost a mental health issue,
NEW STUDY: MORE THAN HALF OF ALL FEMALE-TO-MALE TRANSGENDER TEENS ATTEMPT SUICIDE 05/10/2019 https://winteryknight.com/2019/05/10/new-study-more-than-half-of-all-female-to-male-transgender-teens-attempt-suicide-2/
Also of note:
Why Puberty Blockers Are A Clear Danger To Children’s Health - 12/18 As much as transgender ideologues disguised as doctors want to claim otherwise, some drugs pose serious and lasting risks to children. https://thefederalist.com/2018/12/14/puberty-blockers-clear-danger-childrens-health/
and again
Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;’ Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’ By Michael W. Chapman | June 2, 2015 https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/johns-hopkins-psychiatrist-transgender-mental-disorder-sex-change
bornagain77
May 10, 2019
May
05
May
10
10
2019
11:25 PM
11
11
25
PM
PDT
KF
BB, the lists I have put on the table are in use in policy-influencing contexts...
I’m afraid that this is just nonsense. No policy making body is looking at your gender list and taking it seriously. Feel free to provide evidence that I am wrong. Not just things like “transgendered” or “two spirited” but some of the genders you have been providing in your alphabet soup. However, the US government has granted tax free status to all of the names I provided in my list. Policy making bodies obviously taking them seriously.Brother Brian
May 10, 2019
May
05
May
10
10
2019
10:15 PM
10
10
15
PM
PDT
BB, the lists I have put on the table are in use in policy-influencing contexts in the first instance and in the second, are used by the leading online entity, Facebook. The framing principle of separating "gender" from genetically grounded complementarity of the two sexes has been pushed by any number of entities of academic and policy influence. If one simply observes the evolution of the usual alphabet soup list (now at LGBTQI noting the T especially), one will see that it is shaped by precisely these factors and is definitely applied to policy and academic contexts. Your doubling down and attempted dismissal fail yet again. In so failing, your argument inadvertently reflects the point that the system as well as its manifestations in various lists and schemes, is absurd and indefensible on its face.Which is the precise point, we have a ruinous agenda afoot, currently destroying women's sports and a couple of years past trying to push men into bathrooms used by young girls. There are many other associated absurdities including medical malpractice that seeks to manipulate bodies chemically and surgically to reflect imagined "gender." KFkairosfocus
May 10, 2019
May
05
May
10
10
2019
09:51 PM
9
09
51
PM
PDT
F/N: Maybe I should give a summary of my advice as to when one has enough knowledge base for a responsible, semi independent exposition of scripture. On hearing a text or topic, you instantly, automatically have a cross-referenced, chronologically developed awareness of the whole counsel of scripture on the topic, with onward topics back to the core of Christian theology. Simultaneously, you should be able to recognise and correctly integrate the content of the creedal summary known as the Nicene Creed into a similar cross-referenced framework and can address or better anticipate typical objections and misunderstandings. Further, one should be able to summarise the core warrant for the Christian faith and in a nutshell answer common objections. In addition, one should be able to use standard original language tools, so that one can reasonably refer to standard explanations of key terms in the original, Strongs being the key first level source. If you cannot meet these criteria, you are in no position to responsibly expound or frame teachings soundly. Notice, I here speak at lay level; at professional level, we are talking courses in original languages, exposure to systematic theology, training in relevant disciplines and more. A professional theologian needs at least a Masters as initial level, and the research doctorate is the standard full professional level. Far too many underqualified and ill informed people venture out, imagining that they know more than they do and dismissing due correction of their blunders. KFkairosfocus
May 10, 2019
May
05
May
10
10
2019
09:38 PM
9
09
38
PM
PDT
KF
BB, the very fact that you imagine the two to be comparable shows the depth of error in drawing inappropriate analogies and using such toxically.
I completely agree with you. The two lists are not a valid analogy. Yours is a list that nobody, other than a few conspiracy theorists, takes seriously. Mine is a government recognized, tax exempt list of real Christian denominations.Brother Brian
May 10, 2019
May
05
May
10
10
2019
09:16 PM
9
09
16
PM
PDT
BB, the very fact that you imagine the two to be comparable shows the depth of error in drawing inappropriate analogies and using such toxically. It is noteworthy that, having a warranted corrective in front of you, you doubled down on the error. Case proved. KFkairosfocus
May 10, 2019
May
05
May
10
10
2019
08:49 PM
8
08
49
PM
PDT
BB, I cannot but notice your fallacious misuse of the no true scotsman fallacy and the Leff grand sex WHO, to infer that there is not an objective core that identifies "the faith, once for all delivered unto the saints." The underlying problem lies in the same refusal to attend to the core gospel and its evidentiary warrant that founds the Christian faith and challenges all worldviews that cannot address the reality of Jesus of Nazareth. The who who defines the Christian faith is he who fulfilled 300+ prophecies of messiah and was shown to be Son with power by the resurrection from the dead with 500 unstoppable eyewitnesses.By that same authentication, he was shown to be the Logos, Reason Himself, Creator and upholder of the cosmos by his powerful word. The root and core reality of ordering laws of nature. In that context, as was pointed out above but was studiously distracted from, he is the centre of legitimate authority. His sent Ambassadors, the Apostles, were authenticated as primary witnesses of truth, which we have on C1 record. That witness defines and specifies in quite objective terms, what the faith is and who is legitimately a disciple, born again, saved, in transformation of truth, power, purity. Such necessarily involves repentance and purification from sins incompatible with being a child of the Day. All this and more can be elaborated, and you already have seen but studiously ignored one of the yardsticks on moral transformation 1 Cor 6:9 - 11. Elsewhere, you have shown that you lack familiarity and facility with the scriptures, ending up in ill advised distortions. In short, there are cogent answers but as you studiously avoid addressing the core warrant for the gospel, you are in no position to handle the issue soundly. As this thread and others demonstrate. I suggest, you would be well advised to think again, starting with the Habermas minimal facts discussion. KFkairosfocus
May 10, 2019
May
05
May
10
10
2019
08:45 PM
8
08
45
PM
PDT
KF
BB, it seems fallacies of irrelevance and toxic distortion on your part know no bounds.
I posted a list of Christian sects in America to show how absurd the alphabet soup of denominations is. I did this as a counterpoint to your absurd posting of the alphabet soup of gender identity that you grabbed from a fringe web site. Apparently we are both guilty of toxic distortion.Brother Brian
May 10, 2019
May
05
May
10
10
2019
08:44 PM
8
08
44
PM
PDT
1 2 3 4 11

Leave a Reply