Booman diarist hfiend wrote about this poll yesterday, but I want to renew the conversation here.
The results, I thought, didn’t actually say very much. 2% of Americans say they don’t believe in God, and better than 60% want religious leaders to keep their nose out of politics. Those figures are much lower than some other countries.
But this study mixes apples and oranges: unless I’m missing something fairly significant, the US and South Korea are quite different in socio-economic measures. And how in the world can you compare Mexico with Western Europe?
Even where there are points of comparison–as between the US, Canada, and Europe–it’s long been acknowledged that the US is a religious anomaly. We’ve also had a distinct history. Go figure.
For that matter, judging a nation’s religious fervor by asking if its citizens believe in God is a piss-poor measure. Though these responses match those of other polls on the subject, it’s the wrong question to ask. A better one would be frequency of participation in worship. Ask that, and you’ll discover that while the US is still more religious than other countries, the gap between them is smaller than the AP/Ipsos poll shows.
As for whether or not religious leaders should try to influence government decisions, let me just say two things.
First, I am a religious leader. Should I not try to influence government decisions? I’m not being facetious here. I just want to bring out a quintessentially American point: while I may be a pastor, I am also a citizen, and as such, entitled to my First Amendment rights.
More important, what is unique about America is the paradox at the heart of our separation of church and state: while the church may have lost formal power with the state, it has gained informal power, the power of moral persuasion, in our society. It’s as if the further dance partners stood from one another, the more clearly they could speak to one another.
Which is not an argument for or against the separation clause or the normative position religion holds in American society. It is to say, however, that as long as there is a separation of the two elements, the one will have the ability to speak truth to the other–and their relationship will remain fraught. As long as there is the separation of church and state, in other words, the church will criticize the state and suggest that changes be made. That in turn will make folks in civil society very nervous, which in turn…
This democratic experiment of ours looks like high-wire act sometimes, doesn’t it?
isn’t religion more about what you do than what you believe? Just ask this guy if you don’t believe me.
it should be about deeds but not words, but I think we’ll agree that’s not how many American “Christians” act.
Also, is 2% a well-established number for people who will fess up to being atheist/agnostic? It seems quite low to me.
I know I live in the great heathen nation of New York City, but even when I lived in the Midwest I knew quite a few people who would not consider them selves believers in god. And many that did would not consider themselves adherents to theistic religions, having more of a general spirituality. Which is where I’m at, believing that all of creation is divine (and us with it). And that we must accept the responsibility that comes with being a part of the divinity of nature. The act of creation, as artists and as procreators, is where we touch that part of the universe. (I know, I sound a bit like I believe in the Force) Having said all that, I would not answer a question of whether I believe in God in the affirmative.
If you look at the AP/Ipsos questions, it’s a range of possible responses–from no, there is definitely no God to yes, there definitely is a God. It’s actually a pretty clever set of questions. And yes, that 1-2% seems to match what other surveys say. I think a firm “I don’t know” is probably the most common non-faith response.
It is a very vexing question, though. How do you measure a negative?
That’s the passage I think of when people talk about religion and politics in the same breath. Governmental action generally is “that which is Caesar’s”.
It’s as if the further dance partners stood from one another, the more clearly they could speak to one another.
That’s the best description I’ve read.
Your comment: “…it’s the wrong question to ask. A better one would be frequency of participation in worship.“
I’m not sure that this would work either. As far as I can tell there are a number of people who do participate with some frequecy who don’t necessarily believe in god. To those I’ve spoken to it’s about keeping traditions alive or because they feel pressure to attend.
Yes, but you see my point, right? Belief and practice are two separate categories. Why try to measure one by the other?
And again, look at the questions AP/Ipsos asked. Some of the categories are actually pretty descriptive of people’s experience–“Sometimes I believe in God. At other times, I don’t.” That sounds like the more honest folks I know in the pews.
Anderson Coooper just said that religious people are fatter.
He’s going to discuss some new study about that tomorrow.
Probably because they’re older. We’re also supposed to be in better health, particularly mental health.
I love the last three paragraphs. It’s a more elegant version of what I’ve been saying: When you mix religion with government, you travel down a road. At one end of the road is Osama bin Laden; at the other end of the road is the next head of the Church of England, Prince Charles.
I think religion is strong in this country precisely because it doesn’t depend on government to prop it up.
It’s interesting that Mexico has a high percentage of believers, but they’re firmly against any involvement between government and religion. I wish more Americans would take a cue from them.
Mixing church and state is a slippery slope, any way you look at it. There are hundreds of thousands (millions maybe) of Christians who would love to establish a theocracy in America. The theocratic governments of Iran and Afghanistan make them green with envy. We can’t allow it to happen here.
I glimpsed a Christian site which tried to make a distinction between Church/State and religion/politics.
Like -of course we don’t believe in mixing Church and State but if we are guided by our personal religion it must affect our politics. Oh must it?
Another argument was given in Canada from a member of parliament who quit his party to become an independent. He claimed that his party was interfering with ‘freedom of religion.’ Why? because it was working on a policy to sanction same sex marriage.
but your overall point is well taken.
But I really don’t wish more Americans would take their cues from Mexicans, because I know why Mexicans are like that: the period of turmoil that brought the PRI to power was virulently anti-ecclesiastical, with priests being strung up from lampposts across the country.