PaulSpoerry.com

According to a recent Pew survey, 21 percent of atheists in the United States believe in “God or a universal spirit,” and 8 percent are “absolutely certain” that such a Being exists. Sam Harris, author of Letter to a Christian Nation and The End of Faith, wonders if they were also “absolutely certain” they understood the meaning of the term “atheist.”

Since that really didn’t make any sense, he recently conducted a much more detailed poll of atheists and devout Christians through his website. Some of the results were as expected, others were a bit shocking. The results can be viewed via the links below. “For each statement the number of respondents averaged around 5000, 80-90% of whom were atheists. The numbers of Christian responses ranged from 254-787.”

Personal Data and Attitudes towards Science, Journalism, Politics, etc.

Psychological Beliefs

Religious Beliefs

Read the rest of this entry »

It’s often trumped in the media just how powerful the “religious right” is, as well as how fervent they are in their beliefs. We’ve come to know our country as this highly Christianized version of America. However, a recent Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life study released yesterday indicates that many are contradicting the teachings of their own faiths, saying that truth comes in many forms. Large majorities of Americans say that many religions - not just their own - can lead to eternal life, and that there is more than one way to interpret religious teachings.

“As Americans rub shoulders with people of other religious traditions, they are less judgmental, and less likely to offer pronouncements about other people’s eternal life,” said Rice University sociologist D. Michael Lindsay.

Read the rest of this entry »

Wow, this is just an awesome speech. Alan Keyes says “Jesus Christ would not vote for Barack Obama.” Keyes claims Obama is not a true Christian, and Barack’s response is just awesome. If we had more people in politics who held religious beliefs but understood that while it’s perfectly reasonable to expect someone to have religious beliefs, but that those beliefs cannot be the only arguement for policy, our country would be a much better place. Obama discusses how to reconcile faith with our modern, pluralistic democracy.

“For one, they need to understand the critical role that the separation of church and state has played in preserving not only our democracy, but the robustness of our religious practice. Folks tend to forget that during our founding, it wasn’t the atheists or the civil libertarians who were the most effective champions of the First Amendment. It was the persecuted minorities, it was Baptists like John Leland who didn’t want the established churches to impose their views on folks who were getting happy out in the fields and teaching the scripture to slaves. It was the forbearers of the evangelicals who were the most adamant about not mingling government with religious, because they did not want state-sponsored religion hindering their ability to practice their faith as they understood it.

Moreover, given the increasing diversity of America’s population, the dangers of sectarianism have never been greater. Whatever we once were, we are no longer just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers.

And even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools? Would we go with James Dobson’s, or Al Sharpton’s? Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is ok and that eating shellfish is abomination? How about Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith? Or should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount - a passage that is so radical that it’s doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application? So before we get carried away, let’s read our bibles. Folks haven’t been reading their bibles.

This brings me to my second point. Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God’s will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.”

You can, and in fact SHOULD, watch the video above or read the full text here.