Showing posts with label Atheist Republic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Atheist Republic. Show all posts
Atheist Republic ðŸ”Ž The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) noted that one in five girls worldwide, or 650 million women, were forced to marry as children.


Despite efforts by institutions such as the United Nations to put an end to child and forced marriages (CFM), they are still prevalent in many parts of the world. In a remote province in Pakistan, a woman and her family are putting up a fight against an outdated and illegal tradition of forced marriage in their village that has haunted her for much of her life.

When 25-year-old Inteha Bibi was engaged last year, she thought it was the happiest moment of her life, not only because she would get to marry the man of her choice but also because she thought she found freedom from a centuries-old tradition that threatened her life since she was 12 years old, when a man laid claim to her.

But her fiance and his family broke off the engagement within just a few months after a man who laid claim on Bibi when she was 12, Mahabat Khan, was trying to enforce a ghag on Bibi . . . 

Continue reading @ Atheist Republic.

12-Year-Old Pakistani Girl's Battle Against Forced Marriage Shocks Community

Atheist Republic On August 26, a French court decided to deport an imam to Morocco.


Hassan Iquioussen, who was born in France but held Moroccan citizenship, is accused of anti-Semitic hate speech.

The Minister of the Interior of France, Gérald Darmanin, posted a tweet later that day which roughly translates to:

The Council of State validates the expulsion of Mr. Iquioussen who holds and propagates in particular anti-Semitic comments and contrary to equality between women and men. This is a great victory for the Republic. He will be expelled from the national territory.

Fifty-eight-year-old Iquioussen, infamous for his controversial anti-Semitic comments and misogyny, has a wide following of over 174,000 subscribers on YouTube and over 44,000 Facebook followers, which he operates from his home in northern France.

After the Paris Administrative Court suspended the expulsion of Hassan by order of the Interior Minister in late July, the case reached the supreme court of France.

Hassan’s lawyers strongly defended Hassan in the Paris court by saying that the expulsion would create "disproportionate harm" to his "private and family life."

Continue reading @ Atheist Republic.

France To Deport Moroccan Imam Over Anti-Semitic Speech

Atheist RepublicOn August 15, Saudi actor Abdullah Al-Sadhan posted a video on Twitter of a woman wearing a full-face veil singing and conveyed his unwavering support for her performance.



The video of a Niqab-clad woman singing went viral on social media platforms which caused massive outrage in Saudi Arabia.

The actor commended the woman in his tweet for her voice and wrote, "I just want to say that may Allah protect you. Finding a job and earning money for sustenance is difficult. Keep going with your beautiful voice regardless of what others think about you."

However, some from religious Saudi Muslim communities did not appreciate her endeavor, as singing is considered haram, and such performances by women are akin to traditional and religious taboos. This sparked a flurry of negative comments against her.

One Twitter user wrote, "O Lord, may you open for her a door to a livelihood other than singing,"

While another user wrote, "I say fear Allah. A halal [religiously permissible] livelihood is what is rich and joyful."

And a third user questioned why she wore the Niqab while singing and performing. 

Continue reading @ Atheist Republic.

Saudi Muslim Community Outraged By Women In Niqab Singing

Atheist RepublicTeachers have been bewildered by the introduction of religious teachings in school education in Florida.
 
 
Governor Ron DeSantis recently launched a Civics Literacy Excellence Initiative (CLEI), which made Floridian teachers attend a three-day training session to learn how to indoctrinate students about Christianity.

This training regime is a part of Governor Ron DeSantis' $106 million initiative. After completing the course, the teachers will get the Florida civics seal of excellence and a bonus of $3000. DeSantis stated that 2,500 teachers would complete the program by the end of this month.

In a press conference in Sanford, DeSantis stated that the program is "unabashedly promoting civics and history that is accurate, and that is not trying to push an ideological agenda." The governor added, "You're learning the real history. You're learning the real facts, but it's not gonna be done in a way that's trying to indoctrinate students with whatever modern agenda that somebody may have".

The teachers of Florida were appalled after a three-day training session in Broward County. The initiative was designed to prepare students to be virtuous citizens but was steeped in conservative, Christian ideology.

Continue reading @ Atheist Republic.

Secularists Launch Probe Into Christian Nationalism In Florida Curriculum

Atheist Republic ✒ The decision of the United Kingdom's Department of Education to prohibit a Salafi activist from spreading his hateful teachings was welcomed by the National Secular Society (NSS). 


This ruling notes that several harmful sermons were published. This decision prevents the former faith school proprietor from managing private or state school teachings.

As publicly declared by the Department of Education (DfE), self-ascribed Salafi, Abu Khadeejah (his most recognized name) was banned from officiating school teachings or engaging in conduct that is "aimed at undermining the fundamental value of individual liberty."

Abu Khadeejah, aka Waheed Alam (his real name), once managed the teachings at Islamic Redstone Educational Academy in Birmingham, UK.

Alam produced several sermons using an online platform and writings between 2015 & 2019 that reflected his aversion to the LGBTQ population and distaste for women's rights. His works, as the Department of Education, describes, "fail to show tolerance of, and respect for, the rights of others." The publishings included his views seeking to "restrict the activities of women" and "denigrate and demonize gay men."

Continue reading @ Atheist Republic.

Islamic Leader Banned By UK Dept of Education For Homophobia & Misogyny

Atheist Republic ✒ On June 5, 2022, BJP national spokesperson Nupur Sharma and BJP Delhi media head Naveen Kumar were suspended from the party’s membership due to offensive comments to many Muslims in India.

In the footage below, Sharma mocks Buraq (the flying donkey), the Quran, for describing the world as flat, and points out the age of the Prophet’s wife, Aisha, in a TV debate last week.

Kumar has been removed from the party for a tweet that also insulted the prophet. That controversial tweet has been deleted.

“ I’ve been receiving death and rape threats, including beheading threats against me and family members,” Sharma said. She also stated on Twitter that her words came in response to insults against the Hindu god Shiva.

"If my words have caused discomfort or hurt religious feelings of anyone whatsoever, I hereby unconditionally withdraw my statement," she said, but her apology may have come too late.

The actions of these former BJP members stirred an international backlash from the Muslim world.

“The State of Qatar calls on the Indian government to immediately condemn these remarks and publicly apologize to all Muslims around the world,” Qatari Foreign Ministry spokesperson Majed Mohammed Al Ansari said.

Continue reading @ Atheist Republic.

Blasphemous Remarks By Hindu Politician Cause Diplomatic Troubles For India

Atheist Republic On May 23, 2022, the Charity Commission for England and Wales ordered Islamic Research Foundation International (IRFI) to shut down after an inquiry found that it had funded TV programming that promoted violence.



The National Secular Society (NSS) has expressed its concerns about IRFI since 2018 while questioning the involvement of Zakir Naik, founder and president of the IRFI, in an open letter to the charity commission.

The NSS specified the IRFI's record in its 2019 report, “For the public benefit?”, which calls for reform of charity law to remove 'the advancement of religion' from being listed as a ‘charitable purpose.’

PeaceTV, a television program involved with the IRFI, was reprimanded in 2012 by the Broadcasting regulator Ofcom after Naik said he "tended to agree" that Muslims should be executed if they leave Islam and tried to proselytize a different religion "against Islam."

In 2020, Naik’s Peace TV and Peace TV Urdu were fined £300,000 for “broadcasting hate speech and incitement to commit murder.”

According to the NSS, they also had a long line of very controversial speakers like Bilal Philips, who the US government named as a co-conspirator in the 9/11 attacks.

Continue reading @ Atheist Republic.

Islamic Charity Shut Down By UK Government For Promoting Violence

Atheist Republic ✒ Shocking Report of Sexual Abuse in Southern Baptist Church Rocks Nation.


In the nearly 300-page report of an independent investigation, the first correlative study of the immense Protestant sect of Southern Baptists, several top clergy members were found to have minimized, ignored, and even vilified sex abuse survivors who came forward for help. Released on Sunday, May 22nd, this third-party examination was gathered by the Guidepost Solutions organization, just as Southern Baptist Church (SBC) leaders had requested.

The seven-month investigation report states the abuse survivors’ emails and phone calls were “only to be met, time and time again, with resistance, stonewalling, and even outright hostility” by church leaders. These leaders seemed less concerned about protecting SBC members from further abuse and more about protecting the institution from liability.

Top leaders kept a secret list for many years while lying to Southern Baptists. These same SBC members requested that the leaders maintain a database of sex offenders as a preventative measure against more abuse. Further shocking new evidence emerged from this investigation that detailed specific abuse cases and shed light on how denominational leaders actively resisted calls for abuse prevention for decades.

Continue Reading @ Atheist Republic.


As a denomination of 13 million members, the SBC has grappled with declining membership during the past 15 years. Other denominations have also been subject to steep declines. The SBC has long thwarted any comparisons with the Catholic Church regarding its sexual abuse case numbers. Yet the report states that some senior leaders of the SBC had been supporting and protecting alleged abusers.

Many sex abuse survivors are relieved that the investigation has finally blown the cover-ups wide open. However, they are still surprised to see the pattern of such cover-ups at the highest levels of church leadership.

A female sex abuse survivor, once the highest-paid executive at the SBC, stated, “I knew it was rotten, but it’s astonishing and infuriating.” Jennifer Lyell’s story of abuse is part of the investigation. “This is a denomination that is through and through about power. It is misappropriated power. It does not in any way reflect the Jesus I see in the scriptures. I am so gutted.”

Shocking Report of Sexual Abuse In Southern Baptist Church Rocks Nation

Atheist Republic’s ✒Twitter account, the largest atheist account on the platform, has been suspended yet again.


Susanna McIntyre, the CEO of Atheist Republic, reports that she was met with an “Account Suspended” notification when she tried logging in to Atheist Republic’s Twitter on Friday, April 1st, 2022.

Atheist Republic’s Twitter account was previously suspended over a false DMCA copyright infringement claims in November 2021. “The copyright infringement claims against us were obviously false, so it was much easier to get our account back because we simply had to wait for our counter-notifications to be processed,” McIntyre explained.

What is unusual about this most recent suspension is that Atheist Republic has received no formal written notice that details what policy or community standard rule was violated and was therefore the reason for suspension. Twitter users are typically emailed a list of their tweets and/or content that broke the platform’s community guidelines when given restrictions or full suspensions, and these emails serve as an explanation for the punitive action.

You can help Atheist Republic by tweeting and tagging “@TwitterSupport” and asking Twitter to look into the cause of the suspension and to issue an explanation for the suspension.

Continue reading @ Atheist Republic.

Atheist Republic Suspended From Twitter Without Notice!

Atheist Republic ✒ A study sponsored by the Humanist Society of Scotland revealed many Scots are departing from religion and religious identity. 


The study showed a stark difference compared to a similar survey in 2011. The survey conducted by YouGov, an international research data and analytics group, asked more than 1002 adults about their religious preferences.

The study administered an online survey from February 24 to 28, 2022. The survey was emailed to respondents, then directed to a link to take the survey.

When asked about what religious denomination they belong to, 56% of the respondents chose “None” in their response. In 2011, only 42% of the respondents responded “none” to a similar question.

In 2011, 53% of the adults in Scotland said they identify as Christian. The number has decreased significantly to 33% in 2022.

Of those who identified as Christians in the recent survey, only 28% said they “believe that Jesus was a real person who died and came back to life and was the son of God.”

The survey also showed that 70% of people aged 18 to 24 said they have no religion. This number was only at 50% in 2011.

The Scottish trend of departure from religion has been happening for a long time. Aside from not identifying with a religion, most Scotts are now married through “humanist marriages.”

The Humanist Society of Scotland said in 2019, there were 5,879 humanist marriages, compared to the 5,812 Christian marriages in the same year.

Continue reading @ Atheist Republic,

New Survey ✑ 70% Of Young Scottish Adults Have No Religion

Atheist RepublicFor the last decadePatheos, a multifaith media platform that hosts commentary from writers of different religions and the religiously unaffiliated, has been going in a concerning direction. 

Abdulla Gaafarelkhalifa

According to departing bloggers and their manager, Dale McGowan, the nonreligious channel has been steered away from criticizing religion.

Fifteen bloggers left the site in the last days of 2021, including Hemant Mehta of the Friendly Atheist. He stated “The writing on the wall was that unless you’re prepared to say nice things about religion you need to find a new outlet.”

Adam Lee, who wrote the “Daylight Atheism” blog for Patheos, said, “What they were asking of us was not compatible with the editorial tone we had taken until then.” He added “Many of us felt this would require an editorial shift to such an extent as to make our blogs unrecognizable.” If one were to visit the nonreligious channel today, it's considerably more spacious than it used to be.

Everyone who left Patheos can now be found at OnlySky, where Dale McGowan will be their new editor and chief. The site will launch sometime this month.

Continue reading @ Atheist Republic.

Atheist Bloggers Told To Stop Criticising Religion

Atheist Republic ✒ On December 16, 2021, American Atheists announced their success in a lawsuit on behalf of Mari Leigh Oliver, a nonreligious high school student in Houston, Texas.

By Abdulla Gaafarelkhalifa



The student not only objected to reciting “under God”, but did not feel that “liberty and justice to all” applied to all citizens, particularly those of color. The lawsuit was filed against her teacher, Benjie Arnold, who retaliated against her for sitting out the Pledge of Allegiance.

In June, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals refused to grant the Houston suburb teacher qualified immunity. Arnold then petitioned for a rehearing. On December 15, by a vote of 10-7, the Fifth Circuit of Appeals rejected Arnold’s request.

Geoffrey T. Blackwell, American Atheists’ Litigation Counsel, spoke on the rejection. “This is an important victory for nonreligious Americans’—and all Americans’—freedom of speech… The classroom is not a pulpit. It is a place of education, not indoctrination. No student should be punished for exercising her First Amendment rights.”

Continue reading @ Atheist Republic.

Teacher Who Harassed Non-Religious Student Loses Court Appeal

Atheist Republic The percentage of people not identifying under any religion has been growing in Northern Ireland. 

According to the Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey 2020, on question "Do you regard yourself as belonging to any particular religion?", about 27% of the population identified as non-religious, which is a 7% increase compared to the percentage of non-religious people in 2019.

According to past data, the number of non-religious people has doubled through the last decade, as it was 12% in 2009. Humanists of Northern Ireland welcomed the survey result mentioning that they anticipate that the surge in the number of non-religious identifying people is the consequence of changing beliefs and attitudes of the society as a whole. They are hopeful that these changing numbers will have a positive impact on the law and policy in Northern Ireland.

The coordinator of Northern Ireland Humanists, Boyd Sleator, commented on the result that:

We're delighted to see such rapid growth of the non-religious in Northern Ireland. To us, this suggests more and more people who have long been non-religious are finding the confidence to identify that way publicly. The non-religious community in Northern Ireland is now reaching parity with the Catholic and Protestant communities.

 

Continue reading @ Atheist Republic.

Surge Of Non-Believers In Northern Ireland!

Atheist RepublicA 41-year-old Christian woman claims to have married the Holy Spirit after abandoning her husband of 20 years in a bizarre incident in Kenya. 


A mother of six, Elizabeth Nalem married the spirit on May 25 in the small town of Makutano, near Kapenguria in the western part of the country. The ceremony took place in the presence of high-ranking local officials from the Anglican Church of Kenya.

Later on, she told local bishops that her act "was the will of God," and a week after the incident, she says she has received her first assignment from God. "This is my wedding with God. He told me, take this 'net' (gown), wear it, and spread the word."

She was later spotted in the Ng'otut area, Kasei Ward in North Pokot along the Kenya-Uganda border.

I told God to raise me up like others. I represent all people, and I collect people like money to enter the kingdom of God," she said as she prepares to head for Uganda, "I am going to Amudat in Uganda. The holy spirit is driving me to Uganda.

Continue reading @ Atheist Republic

Kenyan Woman Leaves Husband, "Marries" The Holy Spirit

Landon Haynes questions some core tenets of the Christian religion. The piece featured in
Atheist Republic.

Image credit: istockphoto.com

There must be four gospels like there are four winds of heaven and four corners of the Earth, wrote Irenaeus. This appears to have been the first Christian figure to compile the four gospels we know today as official canon, and this is the kind of criteria he used. Infighting, alterations, the dropping and adding of books, book burning, mass violence, conquest, slavery, oppression, political selection,editing, the borrowing and re-purposing of past religions continues but the history of the Bible and Christianity is not what this piece is about. Following Irenaeus, four claims made by theists have been on the wind, occupying my own mental space as of late as I've gazed up at the heavens. I've set out to thoroughly dissect them, conclusively. I submit my thoughts that they might be as useful to others as they were therapeutic for me to record.

1. "Non-believers have no moral foundation."

Theists have a horrible moral standard, but they accuse non-theists of having no standards. But generally our standard is universal humanity: the facts of our nature, that we're an interdependent social species with empathy built into us as we have to live together. We can recognize the point in it--that if one group's rights are curtailed ours could be next, etc. We realize we need accurate facts to build our morality on so we indeed appeal to science, understanding there may be facts we presently lack. We try to learn from history. Witness the difference between treating the physically or mentally ill as if they were cursed or possessed by demons (views the Bible espouses) and recognizing them as victims of microorganisms and chemical imbalances, where sick children are taken to the doctor and not the exorcist.

The theist MO is to be a minion. It's might makes right. But how is obedience to authority morality? How is this wise? We follow laws in society because we recognize their benefits and we try to change them or have revolutions if they're fallacious or unbeneficial. We don't blindly and unthinkingly follow laws just because the government said so and is the foundation of morality, it exists because we support and allow it to collectively. If authority is morality any authority could be the foundation of morality, where will that lead (see North Korea)? Shouldn't morality best be bottom up and decided on and discovered and recognized based on our human nature and because it works and makes sense, just like our laws?

Theists special plead and state their god is special, but this is the laughable thing they always do. Once you go from saying there is some thing out there we could call a god to giving specifics about it--it's eternal, the most perfect or just being--you are just making bald-faced assertions that you have no idea about and you're exponentially decreasing the probability that anything you're saying is true or the being you're describing is real. One could ask just where your god got its morals just like you can ask just where did it come from. If it has good reasons for its moral orders we can appeal to those reasons without the middleman. Further, "god's" morals in scripture, and its apparent morals in nature are abhorrent and few would emulate or wish to advocate them minus ridiculous excuses. Further, he has no claim to moral authority or accountability when murderers can come to Jesus and go to heaven while billions go to an eternal torture chamber he's made for not believing something-the most sadistic and unjust idea ever created. In fact, one would be in prison or an insane asylum if one followed the Bible literally.

And what of the fact of all the gods and religions out there? Just all the sects of one religion who agree on little and endlessly slaughtered each other before the coming of secular governments based on the universal humanity and reason and fairness that non-theists advocate? Religion's track record for all of history is almost comically bloody. How is this objective, it's obviously not wise or unifying. If you base your morality on religion, what happens when you lose that religion? On the other hand, you'll never stop being a social animal amongst social animals who generally feels bad at treating another poorly and risks getting treated poorly if you do. Appealing to invisible authorities that can't be justified to non-adherents is a great way to dismiss your fellow humans, and to lose your own humanity, as again history and current headlines all too often attest.
Secular morality is superior to religious morality.

2. "Man is corrupt and his efforts to ‘play God’ will destroy him."

"Increasingly, modern science pursues powers traditionally reserved for the almighty. But those who encroach upon the province of the gods realize too late that the price for entrance is destruction."

So goes the closing narration of the opening episode of the modern 1990s "The Outer Limits" TV show, reminiscent of theist arguments one hears stating that we must "trust in God, not in man" and "science is more dangerous and culpable than religion". So, lightning rods, curing diseases, connecting the world, feeding the multitudes, diminishing poverty and ignorance, doubling life expectancy, scaling the heavens and the stars, understanding the world so that we have leverage on it is destruction? The destruction was already there, that's what compelled us to overcome it. A meteor could have always wiped out life just like a nuke could. But in the latter scenario we have an opportunity for reason and survival (and an opportunity to survive any future meteors). Risk is involved (we're not gods and there are no gods to protect us), but no more than the risk that the "gods" already placed upon us. Just what would the writer of this narration and his theist counterparts have us as a species do?

The replacing of revelation with investigation has been the single greatest and most transformative boon to the human race. Scientific values of objectivity, rationality, open testability, cooperation, and skepticism are bulwarks against darker impulses of bias, prejudice, superstition, and hysteria. It's taken us from cave dwellers to space explorers and creates an overall story that makes belief in human potential the "justified faith" I wrote a whole book about. Every bit of the mind-boggling progress we have seen, including us now being in the best time to be alive in history by virtually every measure, is due to human thought, empathy, cooperation, and action at their most sublime. Meanwhile, imagine if in all these many thousands of years in which the faithful have cried out to
their gods in vain and religion had total control and manipulated and profited from this situation, though never able to prove any of its claims, or uncover any knowledge, or truly better people's lives, imagine if it had modern weaponry in its crusades of righteous tyranny...

3. "Christianity is rational."

"God" sacrificed himself to himself to save us from himself and create a loophole for his own rules, no better way could be thought of, because an uncomprehending rib woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat fruit and pursue knowledge (putting these things in place and knowing what would happen), then cursing all innocent descendants for it? Very rational. A human or blood sacrifice that wasn't really a sacrifice somehow "saves" mankind, and most are still going to hell anyway? Magnificently rational. Sickness is caused by demons requiring exorcism, you don't need to wash your hand before eating, mud and spit cure blindness, faith makes you immune to poison? Quite rational. Having your story be so similar to dozens of gods and myths that came before you? So rational. Salvation depends on belief, which is involuntary (something a god would know) and bad,vague, contradicting, or no evidence? Quite logical. Having your book be filled with barbarism and contradictions? Necessarily logical. Allowing endless religions and sects? Ingenious. Allowing your religion to have a comically horrific history, spread by bloodshed, force, and accident, in which no one can still agree on much of anything? Wise. A man-god predicts his own return within the lives of his listeners, 2,000 years ago now? Sensibly compelling. Three is one and one is three? Deeply comprehensible.

An infinitely loving god allows and causes random atrocity and calamity, regardless of the victims' beliefs or virtue, the scale and depths of which would make most human beings' stomachs turn? Intellectually unassailable. A being is omni-everything that created all in perfect knowledge and power yet makes mistakes, has regrets, and blames things on everyone else? Mentally immaculate. Believing still that the ultimate answers MUST be magical and supernatural despite this NEVER being the answer up until now? Brilliant. Eschewing all the evidence of bottom-up evolution and obstinately demanding complexity requires a designer who would be infinitely more complex?

Supremely reasonable. Holding or commanding faith (as if this is a reliable path to truth) above reason, revelation above investigation-exactly the opposite of the means by which all our progress has been made? Irreproachably sagacious.

Seriously?

4. "There must have been a creator."

Doesn't it make more sense that a universe came first, not a mind, not some super person? In what space does god exist then, and has he just been there, alone and bored forever or does he have company? If complex things need a creator, who or what created god? If god needs no creator and always existed (put aside that this is unsupported special pleading), why can't the universe be the thing that's always existed? It's much simpler than a god and we know it does exist. Doesn't science show, anyway, that things are evolutionary and bottom up? Wouldn't something as complex as a god need to have evolved (if you're not going to again employ special pleading)?

Isn't god just magically poofing things into existence, or himself poofing into existence, just as magical as virtual particles poofing into existence? Except, we know virtual particles exist and do this because we detect them (and wasn't our visible universe once at this quantum size of scale?). And again they're simpler than a god. God is used to explain complexity but does it really, doesn't it just add more complexity and explain nothing, or at least sets the need for an explanation back a step?

And what is "God"? It looks to me like an anthropomorphic projection born of cosmically microscopic human fear and ignorance but isn't it possible there are things one could call "god" that aren't conscious minds, or that are but are just advanced life?

Don't physicists say the universe, at its most fundamental level, is just quantum fields with no trace of purpose or goals? How purposeful or blissful is it to shun the only world we know we have for one of many unsupported hypothetical ones where you spend eternity on bended knee, endlessly praising a master who also is responsible for the endless torture of billions of good people and loved ones?

Four Things

From Atheist Republic a discussion on gender binary by John Redmond.

Image credit: The Independent

Three is greater than two. Do you “agree”? (chuckle) I know, I know. It’s not an “agreement.” You either understand that three is a larger number (greater than) two, or you do not understand. But whether you understand it or not, three is still greater than two. Three is greater than two if you understand it, and it’s greater than two if you don’t understand it. Anyone who does not ‘agree’ is either delusional, ignorant or dishonest. Facts are facts.

There is a lot of fussing lately about “gender binary,” “there are only two genders,” etc. But, those positions are easily rendered as delusional, ignorant or dishonest. They are simply, and demonstrably wrong. In order to demonstrate, we must understand two important words: “gender” and “binary.”
Binary is the simpler of the two so here is the OED, weighing in on what binary means.

1. Relating to, composed of, or involving two things.
2. Relating to or using a system of numerical notation that has two rather than 10 as a base.

We can discard the second definition, since it clearly only applies when you are delineating binary number representations (01110011010) from the standard 10 base counting system (10, 100, 1000).
Binary is relating to, composed of, or involving two things. So, in other words, if there are more than two of something then it would be inaccurate to use ‘binary’ to describe it.

Now let’s look at the definition for “gender.”

1. Either of the two sexes (male and female), especially when considered with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones. The term is also used more broadly to denote a Range of identities that Do Not Correspond To Established Ideas Of Male And Female.

(There are admittedly two long worded secondary and tertiary definitions that I have not included as they are only in reference to word adjustment in languages that modify words by gender suffix, etc, such as “la” and “el” distinctions in Spanish that modify words with the suffixes ‘o’ or ‘a’.)

Read the underlined part of the Oxford English Dictionary definition. It’s important. Here is a quote from Wikipedia’s description of gender. 

Gender is the Range of characteristics pertaining to, and differentiating between, masculinity and femininity. Depending on the context, these characteristics may include biological sex (i.e., the state of being male, female, or an intersex variation), sex-based social structures (i.e., gender roles), or gender identity.


A simple way to summarize these concepts is that gender is “how people perceive sexuality (including their own sexuality) and sexual identification within the context of any culture.”

Yes, the traditional way that the vast majority of people in most cultures “gender identify” is as “male” or “female.” And yes, looking at only the traditional choices, there are two. So, you could even get away with a modified statement such as “traditional gender ID is a binary.” But, as you can see from the definitions, it’s a Range of Personal Identification and people are Not Bound By Tradition.

Another critical point is that we are talking about How People Perceive Themselves. It doesn’t matter at all if you (say, for instance as a random bigot) choose to “not recognize” the way they are gender identifying, just like it doesn’t matter whether or not you acknowledge that three is greater than two. Gender Is how They identify, not about whether or not you personally recognize that identification. If that choice is acknowledged by and recognized within a culture, then it IS a gender.
And, people in cultures around the world identify in more than two ways. The Hijras of Indian culture do not gender identify as either male or female. Neither to the Muxe of Zapotec culture. These are just two of many non-traditional ways that people around the world gender identify. And again, it’s what They say they are. If other people are saying ‘that’s not a gender,’ that doesn’t matter, what gender is – is how They choose to Self-identify within a culture that also acknowledges these IDs. Muxe are a recognized gender within a culture. It’s a gender ID whether you like it or not.
So… we have many. But, we only need three to put this “binary” thing to bed. Let’s use hijras as our one of many, and count. Here are some culturally recognized gender IDs:

1. Male
2. Female
3. Hijra

How many did you count there? Did you get three? Me too! Yay, we are good at counting. Is three greater than two? Yup. It is. The number of acknowledged genders we have listed is greater than two. Gender is not a binary. Now you know.

The “there are only two genders” people are trying to tell you that the only two ways that people identify their own sexuality is “male” and “female.” They are trying to delegitimize the ability of people to choose anything other than those and say “you can’t choose that.” But… again… it doesn’t matter if they don’t like it or not. Gender is how They identify, not whether or not a random bigot recognizes their identification. That is not part of the definition. Three is greater than two whether you recognize the number three or not. Those bigots are simply announcing their ignorance, delusion or dishonesty.

I was having this discussion with a friend of mine last week who was asking it as an opinion question, and used the argument “it’s like asking whether you agree that 2+2=4, that doesn’t make sense. It’s not an opinion question. 2+2=4. You know it, or you don’t.” I was using the wrong math there. It’s NOT like 2+2=4. In fact, it’s something even simpler than that. It’s 3 > 2. It just Is. Male + Female + Hijra = 3. Binary tops out at 2. Therefore, it’s not a binary.

It’s not a debate. You just know that there are more than two. Or you do not know (ignorance). Or you’re delusional (you think that three is not greater than two, and probably also think that Elvis is your boyfriend). Or you are dishonest (I’m going to pretend like you haven’t identified a third gender, because I prefer lying about it).

Three is greater than two whether you like it or not.

And no matter how You Self-Identify, you should know that I love you just the way you are. 

Hugs!


"Three Is Greater Than Two"

From Atheist Republic a piece on Islamic State and the Caliphate. Written by Davyd Von Draco.

 
The idea of a Caliphate is central for many Muslims, and until this issue is addressed within the faith there will be future attempts to co-opt its religious concept as a justification for violent conflict and oppression. But the world can help to lessen the attraction of this concept.

In June 2014 the Islamic State in Iraq and Greater Syria (“ISIS”) was declared by the leader of a group of Sunni fundamentalists, who appear to have had their own brand of Islam, perhaps derived from Salafist teachings, but a bit more extreme in their implementation. They followed in the footsteps of that great US ally the Taliban (when they were fighting the Russians, at least). The core teachings of which really are not much different from those professed in Saudi Arabia, Brunei, and Aceh in Indonesia. What differentiated them was the level of brutality exhibited and their willingness to take their religious teaching seriously.

But they did something very different than any other conservative religious Muslim State, they declared themselves to be the new universal Caliphate. It had a resonance among Muslims worldwide (1), and the DASH leadership were savvy enough to understand that, and to use this emotional response to their advantage. The idea of a renewed Caliphate resonates within even moderate Muslims who cherish the concept of the Islamic Ummah, and long for a renewal of the semi-mythical glory days of a powerful Islamic State.

Men and women came from countries across the world, seeing themselves as “Muslim” before any other tribal or ethnic identity. Admittedly, this was a miniscule percentage of all Muslims, but it was significant in the impact it had on global perceptions of Islam, and also on how Muslims saw themselves. At the time, it reminded me of the Greek war of independence from the Ottomans, back in 1821-32 (2) when some of Europe’s idealistic elements (3) joined in the fight to free the “cradle of Western Civilization” from the despotic Ottomans. When the rebels were on the verge of being crushed, France, the UK and Russia sent warships into the conflict and destroyed the Ottoman relieving fleet (4) and French troops invaded Greece. The West longed for the Golden Age of Greek science, philosophy, and art, forgetting the intolerance that led to the death of Socrates, the useless and destructive Peloponnesian Wars, and the intolerance and autocracy of virtually every Greek city state.

Many of my Muslim friends, while eschewing the violence and intolerance of DASH, had at the same time a nostalgic longing for the days of a unified Muslim world, under a Caliph. (5). Non-Muslims often misunderstand the importance of this communal aspect of Islam, and the feelings that it generates within even moderate Muslim communities. It’s similar to the perspective Jews have towards the Western Wall, of Shinto practitioners to the Ise Shrine, or of Roman Catholics to the Pope – or how the West viewed Greece during its war for independence. While there is nothing wrong, per se, with this idea of a universal Muslim unity, the peril of this desire to be used for militarist or oppressive ends has been aptly demonstrated. Using the allure of a Golden Age to compel people to act in ways they would otherwise eschew has happened before, and it will happen again.

What is the Caliphate?

Under Islam, the community of believers, the ummah (or the ummat al-Islamiyah to give it its full name), was specified in the Koran as not being ethnically based. This strongly distinguishes it from the form of tribalism found in the Jewish Torah and Midrash, and followed the open acceptance approach taken by most polytheistic religions of the day. This is somewhat surprising, as Islam followed many other aspects of Judaism. The Caliphate is a merger of political and religious authority in the figure of the Caliph. It’s a system where temporal and spiritual power is wielded by a single person, not dissimilar to the post-Republican Roman tradition of having the Emperor also acting as the head of the State religion and even being portrayed as a god. (6)

The community is of all believers, and that is the sole requirement for membership. Most contemporary polytheistic religions did not have a concept of exclusive communities, except perhaps for those who had participated in certain “mystery rites” (7). A few religions, such as Judaism, Hinduism, Shintoism, and tribal religions were based on the superiority of certain ethnic groups over others. While you could conquer other countries, they would never easily become part of your religious community. Zoroastrianism, although originally an inclusive religion, as practiced by the Iranian diaspora in India (known as the “Parsi”) also came to be a self-contained religious community – which accounts for their declining numbers.

Buddhism (8), which has always been more of a philosophy melded with local animistic or established religious tendencies, doesn’t fit this mold, but it also lacks a concept of a united Buddhism community. There is no real place for collective action in Buddhist doctrine, nor a role for a philosopher king figure. Indeed, such a role would amount to an attachment to the world which would be in stark opposition to the main thesis of Buddhism (9), which is focused on the release of attachments as a means of the individual pursuit of an advanced consciousness.

Christianity is a bit of an odd case. In its core Gospel teachings, there is really nothing directly about this. But this is not surprising as Jesus (if he existed) was a Jew, primarily preaching to his fellow Jews, and he didn’t seem to like Gentiles or even Samaritans (the Jews remaining from the Northern Kingdom, who didn’t really follow the Judahite Temple movement). His subsequent followers -notably, Paul - (10) debated the relationship of the new religion with that of the established Jewish sects. The new faith was highly fragmented from the outset, and only after a period of brutal repression were three major lines established; the Orthodox run from Constantinople, the Roman Catholic run from Rome, and the Coptic run from Alexandria (11). Many offshoots fled to Central Asia to avoid persecution, such as the Manicheans. There were attempts from time to time by the Roman Catholic Church to consolidate both religious and temporal authority, and the divine right of kings was an attempt to extend the mantle of religious authority over the secular world. But it was imperfect at best, and was never unified and never resulted in a condition where Roman Catholic Nations were unified under one temporal ruler. It worked better with the Byzantine court, but that concept collapsed with military decline of the Eastern Roman Empire (known today as Byzantium) and the fall of Constantinople (first to Crusaders from the West in 1204 AD and then to the Ottomans in 1453 AD) and thereafter Orthodox Christianity became badly fragmented.

Only perhaps in Shinto do we see a mix of temporal and divine authority vested in one figure, that of the Emperor, who was regarded as the Tenno (天皇) or heavenly sovereign (a title probably derived from Chinese form). However, there is little support for the Emperor historically having an active role in ongoing religious affairs. It seems that he was always more of a figurehead, like the latter Emperors of China, being the person to ceremonially officiate, but not the one to determine religious doctrine. Shinto is somewhat unique among major religions in that it is now and often historically was generally regarded as something of an orthopraxy (12). That is, where the ritual conduct is of more importance than the underlying belief.

But the Myth was Never Real

So, Islam is unique - other than perhaps Sikhism - (13) among major universal religions in holding out the ideal that all believers should be united under a single political regime as well, with a sole person vested with authority over both the mundane and divine. In the early days of the Islamic conquests and the first Caliphate, both Sunni and Shia were part of the same ummah and were under the same Caliphate.

But after the Umayyad Caliphate, ending in 750 CE, there were two rival Caliphates, the Abbasid which ruled in the Iberian Peninsula and North Africa, and the Baghdad Caliphate, which was destroyed by the Mongols in 1258 CE. The Abbasids, under Mamluk control in Cairo, took over the role of the Baghdad Caliphate, following its destruction, and this was maintained until 1517 CE. Then the Ottomans conquered Egypt, and Islam was once more united in the Sunni West, covering North Africa (Iberia had been lost in 1492 to the Christian Reconquista), the Saudi Peninsula, the three Holy Cities of Jerusalem, Medina and Mecca, the Levant and Mesopotamia, and Southeastern Europe up to the gates of Vienna. The Shia portion of the Muslim world in what is now largely Iran and Iraq was under the rule of the Ottomans' frequent opponent, the Safavid dynasty, which only emerged as an independent nation in 1501. The last Caliphate was the Ottoman, which ended voluntarily in 1924, when Turkey because a secular State under Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. Since then, there has been no viable claimant to the title of Caliph or Sultan of the Ummah.

But wait, other than that brief period from Islam’s establishment in 618 CE or thereabouts, until 750 CE, there never was a real Caliphate, in the sense of all Muslims being under one ruler with both secular and religious authority. There were many Muslim communities in Africa, the converted Mongols which became the Moguls, and the Golden Horde, as well as the brief empire of Tamerlane in Central Asia. Not to mention what is now the largest Islamic community in the world, in Indonesia.

Indeed, if you look at the top ten largest Muslim populations (by country) in the world today, only 4-5 (14) were ever part of a political Ummah. Nearly 50% of all Muslims today are in the top five countries (Indonesia, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria) which never had an experience with a universal Caliphate, only locally proclaimed ones. So, other than the fact that it’s presented as the ideal condition in the Quran (15), why this longing for a Golden Age that actually never has existed?

What’s Wrong with a Caliphate?

The problem with longing for the return of a Golden Age, is that it invites radical exploitation of the dream. Often, you will hear that the closest example of DASH in recent years was the Mahdist War (16) in Africa (1881- 98 CE), where a local inspirational leader, Muhammad Ahmad, proclaimed himself the Mahdi and went to war to throw off Ottoman rule and the harsh conditions imposed by the Egyptian Khedive administration (which was closely aligned with the British). But for me, this was clearly a struggle for local liberation, albeit using many of the same symbols and religious justifications as were used by DASH. Proclaiming oneself to be the Mahdi is an appeal to an apocalyptic motif, as the Mahdi is to come and rule before the world ends.

I sort of view the idea of a renewed Caliphate as being about as likely as that of Santa Claus giving me a Bible for Christmas – utterly impossible in this universe. While some people may think it a lovely idea for all Muslims to be under one rule, and to speak in the world with one voice, each community and country has its own elites to whom this concept would be anathema, unless of course they were the ones being elevated to the ultimate position as Caliph.

The problem is that it is an easy answer, and it is enmeshed within unrealistic religious belief and expectations. Following the fall of colonialism, most majority Muslim countries underwent a period of optimism about their economic and political future. As we’ve seen from the Arab Spring, the patience of many people for the promised results is fading. Modern appeals to nationalism are not as effective as those made to stronger and longer rooted religious convictions. Most modern Muslim States did not exist even 100 years ago, so nationalism has not fully taken hold of people’s loyalties. Most current boundaries were those used by the colonial powers for their own convenience or from military expediency. Few Muslim countries have a unified tribal/ethnic group, although some have a dominant one (Pashtuns in Pakistan, Bengalis in Bangladesh, Javanese in Indonesia, etc.).

So, what is the danger? An appeal to a Caliphate is like Donald Trump’s invocation to “Make America Great Again”. Its an allure to an undefined and yet idealized past, where any current crimes or deprivations are justified for the attainment of the ultimate “good.” Everyone “knows” that a Caliphate would solve the problems they are facing of corrupt Governments, venal sovereigns, lack of piety, and a perceived loss of Muslim prestige and power (although it’s been a long time since the Ottomans were a world power, yet the dream remains). No one demands to know what the Caliphate will look like, any more than a Trump supporter could tell you in what year America was “great” so that they would all know what we are going back to.

A Caliphate also has bigoted connotations. In a Caliphate run under Sharia law, non-believers are second class citizens. One big step up from slaves, they were still restricted from many items of ownership, jobs, rights and privileges. Yes, many did hold high office in the Ottoman Empire from time to time, but these were the exceptions and not the rule. Many authors have considered the Ottoman rule to be rather beneficent to non-Muslims, especially historians focused on the acceptance in Istanbul of the Jews expelled from Spain. But that is largely because the alternative Christian countries were so horrible. This was the period when the Spanish were torturing, killing or expelling non-Christians. The Europeans were engaged in wholesale slaughter amongst themselves over religion as Protestantism rose to prominence in some countries.

It was probably ok to be a second-class citizen in the 16th and 17th Century CE, when the alternative was to be dead, but in today’s world? Whenever you hear about the Caliphate, the first thing that should spring to mind is “established inferiors.” It would be tantamount to institutionalized bigotry on a religious and secular foundation. And for too many Muslims, that bigotry is what is yearned for. It's not the unified political umbrella – just ask yourself, what self-respecting Javanese, Indian, or Nigerian wants to be ruled by an Arab based in Algeria? No, people know that the political side is beyond reach, but the idea of moral ascendency remains paramount in people’s conceptualization of the Caliphate.

When times are hard, it’s somehow satisfying for many people to know that there is someone who has it even worse than you do. Muslims are the true believers, and as such they seek to see some evidence of Allah’s appreciation of this (17). Yet outside of a few very oil-rich States, most majority Muslim countries are at the low end of the economic achievement scale. They lack power, influence, and toil for low living standards. Even Pakistan securing the “Muslim Bomb” has filed to enhance Pakistan’s international standing. Muslim countries are not unique, they seek respect and recognition, and when its not granted to them on an ethnic or cultural basis, then they look to the larger tribal community element, that of religion, for self-justification.

What is the solution?

The lure of the Caliphate can best be addressed by giving majority Muslim Nations a degree of respect and cultural acknowledgment that has heretofore been lacking in the Western mindset. When a Nation or tribal group sees itself as being respected and valued for its achievements and abilities independent of its religion, then the siren song of a Caliphate will be diminished.

Compare DASH with the experience in Northern Ireland. In Northern Ireland, local Roman Catholics were historically repressed by the Anglican Irish community, which were backed by the British, which started invading Ireland around 1169 AD, and controlled all of Ireland from 1603 AD until 1922 AD when most of Ireland declared independence, and the UK was too exhausted from WWI to fight it out any longer. Northern Ireland, which was majority Anglican, stayed as a part of Great Britain. Some parts of the Roman Catholic minority in Northern Ireland began armed agitation for union with the State of Ireland, with the conflict reaching a high point from the late 1960s until a settlement was reached in 1998/9 (18), a period sometimes known as “The Troubles.”

But during the Troubles, there was no ardent support coming in from Roman Catholic nations. The underlying cultural affiliations were paramount, despite the tribal distinctions being religious. Everyone knew and understood that this was the old elites against the now more numerous historically disenfranchised population. Religion had been the original cause or justification of the distinction between the two groups, together with the alliance with the English, but there was an understanding among Roman Catholic world-wise that this was not a war about religion. The same came be said of most conflicts in the Muslim world today, where religion serves as the flag under which a war for economic or political aims is being fought. But when people lack confidence or respect in their own political polities, then that flag can act as a magnet attracting the frustrated zealot.

Non-Muslim States promote this vulnerability when they coddle corrupt tyrannies, often in the name of religious tolerance. Is it any wonder that the majority of the world’s functioning monarchies (that is, where monarchs have real political power) are Muslim? When reading “white papers” about Muslim States published by Western Governments, it’s almost like reading that different standards should be applied. As though Muslims prefer autocracy and dictatorships, and would be unable to cope otherwise. People in Muslim countries are not immune to this patronizing sentiment, as its even sometimes espoused in their home countries.

When people take pride in their local heritage, the emphasis on personal value being derived through religious affiliation is lessened. Radicalism is a response in virtually every culture to a perception of unrightable wrongs, to a feeling of injustice, and of social denigration. These problems do not exist because of Islam, and they are not wholly the creation of local societies - take Iran, as an example where the radicalization was largely due to Western interference - (19). When your own conditions are tolerable, then the siren call of a new Caliphate is easily dismissible as the idle fantasy of radicals. But when people find themselves without hope, and respect, and an improving future, then the shinning star of a religious/political solution to all problems becomes a powerful and potent opiate for the disenfranchised and disenchanted. The world can not afford to have that happen again.


References

1 Although it's important to note that the Muslim support for this was miniscule. Maybe at best there were a few tens of thousands who joined or actively supported with large donations, but this is a minute fraction of the billion plus Muslims in the world today. What I am talking about here is the emotional “support”, a sort of “cheering for the home team” as it were. Many Muslims like the idea of all Muslims living under a single rule, and the end goal remains the conversion of all peoples.
2 For a thorough, albeit somewhat biased, view of the conflict, see: D. Brewer, “Greek War of Independence” (2001). The West always adopts the same view of the “East” going back to the Greeks’ wars with the Persians, that the Persians or Asians (Ottomans were Asiatic nomads) are despotic and inferior to the West. We still seem to be infected with that view today. No ethnicity has a monopoly on tyranny.
3 More people wrote about it, like Shelley and Byron, than fought in it, and many that did came away with a less than glamorous view of the modern Greeks. This, again, is similar to the experience of the ISIS idealists, who hope to see the grandeur of the past, only to smell the odor of ordinary human lust, greed, ignorance, brutality, and fear.
4 Battle of Navarino, 1827, after which the Ottoman and Western Powers entered into negotiations resulting in a settlement of the conflict and establishing Greece as a monarchy under Western Power protection. An ethnic German assumed the crown of the Greek state. Shows you how much respect the West had for modern Greeks, whatever illusions they of the former glory of the Hellenes.
5A great many Muslim rulers have styled themselves as Caliph, and given themselves powers over the religious as well as secular organs of Government within their control. But I am not talking about these sorts of demonstrably local or regional rulers. I am talking about the Ummah of all believers. Only the large empires got close to this, and it is those class of Governments that I will be discussing here.
6 There is a lot of material on this in the epic “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire” (1788) by E. Gibbons, but a good analysis in more detail is to be found in S. Price “Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor” (1985), which while somewhat dry is very informative.
7 Of which one of the most famous was at Eleusis, in Greece. See Wright, “Eleusinian Mysteries and Rites” and Mylonas “Eleusis and the Eleusinian Mysteries”. A broader treatment of the subject can be found at Angus “The Mystery-religions.” Also of note was the cult of Mithra, which was flourishing around the same time Christianity was taking root, which also was not based on ethnicity.
8See http://www.atheistrepublic.com/blog/dean-van-drasek/problem-buddhism.
9 Although, in Buddhism, there are always exceptions.
10Also known as Paul the Apostle, Saul of Tarsus, or Saint Paul. Letters, known as epistles, which were authored by him make up 14 “books” of the Christian New Testament. Much of what constitutes Christian doctrine actually comes from Paul, and not from the Gospels, which were the narrative stories of the ministry and life of Jesus. Modern scholarship has cast doubt on whether Paul was the actual author of a number of these epistles, however, and 7 are now thought to have been authored by others or are of questionable original source.
11 Which was captured from the Byzantines by the Muslim Rashidun Caliphate in 642 AD. A small community of Copts still remains today in Egypt, numbering about 7 million followers.
12 It's very similar to the case where you have supposedly atheist or agnostic form Jews who still refuse to eat port, ostensibly for “cultural” reasons. Following the practices, without belief, is still a form of religious practice.
13 OK, there is Sikhism, which like Zoroastrianism started off as an inclusive religion but has become somewhat inbred. Is it tribal? Not in form, but in substance. Does it merge secular and religious authority? Yes, to an extent. The Akal Takht (timeless throne) is the supreme decision-making authority, and its sometimes been a single charismatic person, or sometimes a body of elders. Laws or dictates are given to the Sikh community in the form of hymns. The community leader is the guru, who is a considered to be an “illumined soo--ul.” This is very similar to the role of reincarnated Lamas in Tibetan Buddhism.
14 Iran was sort of in at times, but was usually out.
15 Some scholars argue that this is very strained interpretation of what is actually in the Quran, as the author(s) clearly had no idea about the breadth and diversity of their world when it was written. The text references which are taken to be justifications for a Ummah of believers, united as to both political and religious authority, are certainly not clear stipulations. See https://www.al-islam.org/hayat-al-qulub-vol3-allamah-muhammad-baqir-al-m....
16 See Holt, P.M. “The Mahdist State in the Sudan 1881 - 1898: A Study of Its Origin, Development, and Overthrow” (1958) Oxford University Press.
17 Jews, for example, invariably bring up the statistic of the number of (claimed) Jews who have won the Nobel prize – as though this would somehow be of benefit to all Jewish people. But it’s the only indicia of YHWH’s favor that they can come up with, although Israel now is counted among the wealthy countries of the world. Still, there is nothing exceptional.
18 Settled under the “Good Friday Agreement” of 1998, with a unity Government introduced in 1999.
19 See “All the Shah’s Men” by Stephen Kinzer for a good analysis of the history and motivations behind this tragedy.

To Ensure That The ISIS/DASH Caliphate Is Not Repeated, Know and Respect People's Cultures

From Atheist Republic a report of a survey that finds Christianity on the decline in the UK




British Social Attitudes report shows that more than half people in United Kingdom no longer affiliate with an organized religion; precisely the number is 52%. This is bigger number than ever before and also there are 33% of those who are "very" or "extremely" unreligious which is a big rise comparing to 14% of those who felt the same way in 1998. There has also been a decline in the proportion of people who identify with Christianity. This decline is not a private matter of some individuals or families; this is rather a trend with further implications for everyday life. Along with a shift away from religion, there is much more confidence in science and technology among people and that provides an alternative way of understanding the world.

One important note is that every generation is less religious than the one before. “Britain is becoming more secular not because adults are losing their religion but because older people with an attachment to the Church of England and other Christian denominations are gradually being replaced in the population by younger unaffiliated people,” says the report, according to Patheos. “To put it another way, religious decline in Britain is generational; people tend to be less religious than their parents, and on average their children are even less religious than they are.”



People are relatively tolerant of personal faith, Christianity in particular; but they are more and more skeptical about the role of religion in everyday life and in wider society. According to the British Social Attitudes report, "almost two-thirds (63%) agree with the idea that ‘looking around the world, religions bring more conflict than peace,’ while only 13% disagree. Forty-six percent have some degree of confidence in Churches and religious organizations, while a fifth (21%) say they have “no confidence at all.” As our society has become more secular, the role of religious institutions and religious identities in determining our moral and social norms has weakened."

Religion has been challenged by other worldviews and while it was sometimes an answer to every question and every mystery of the world, modern society has found other sources of knowledge and wisdom and religion is not needed as it was before. Scientific rationalism and liberal individualism, worldviews that are gaining popularity in British society according to the report, are shaping how people understand the world, make decisions and relate to each other. There is no need for religion and its teachings to shape and create norms. So as a result, it is becoming less popular in Britain and many other countries.

Christianity More Unpopular Than Ever, UK Survey Finds