It was recently reported that more and more Americans are shedding their religious affiliation:

 

According to a survey done by researchers at Trinity College, the percentage of people who call themselves Christians is down 10 percent since 1990 and the percentage of people claiming no religious affiliation is up nearly 7 percent (totalling nearly 34 million when compared to the population at large). It reveals a telling trend. People are becoming disillusioned with organized religion. But that doesn't necessarily mean they are becoming atheists. It just means they're not identifying themselves with a particular brand of religion anymore.

 

It marks a significant difference between the notion of believing in god and being identified with a religion. Belief in god is an entirely personal matter. It may be heavily influenced by one's surrounding or peers, but in essance it boils down to what the individual believes. It's a simple statement of faith. Someone can easily believe in a god or gods just as easily as they can not believe. But with religion it becomes more complicated.

 

Religion by definition is more broad. It encompasses not just one belief, but a set of beliefs about supernatural forces and how they function among and between god or gods. It involves more philosophy, laying out how this supernatural order people believe works and what they can do to influence or be a part of it. There are many individual elements, but religion also drives a great deal of influence from community. Religious rituals are dependant on creating solidarity and unity among a set of believers. This solidarity comes from rituals involving unique beliefs, practices, or customs. And in the religious landscape of America these rituals have evolved over the years and taken on new meanings.

 

What has arguably been the most influencial force on organized religion is the mixing with politics. The rise of groups like the religious right and the role religion has played in the development of social conservatism has twisted Christianity into more than just a set of beliefs. It has turned it into a political ideology that pushes an agenda. That agenda often includes special treatment for the Christian faith and pursuing social policies such as anti-abortion, abstinence only education, and banning gay marriage. It is very much contrary to the notions of a free society and it has created a messy political discourse that has led Christianity down a complicated path. So it is little wonder why some become disillusioned from it.

 

The study hypothosized many reasons why this movement away from religion is occuring. It could be a result of increasing education among the population. Many studies have shown that the more educated people are, the less religious they are. Others say the September 11th attacks have made it more socially difficult to claim firm religiosity. There may be many other factors, but there is no denying that religion has gotten a bad rap for it's many publicized exploits. From terrorism to a social agenda that espouses prejudice for homosexuals, the ideals of the free society that America represents is clashing with that of individuals.

 

It is unlikely that religion will decline to a point where it is trivial. Religion in many ways is driven by group dynamics and those ingrained instincts will never change. But if religion is to keep its adherents, it is going to have to adapt to a changing population. History has shown repeatedly that when religion gets mixed with political discourse, it becomes corrupt and loses its influence. And this study shows that the population is catching up to religion. The belief in god may persist, but the agenda has to change if it is to stay true to the faith.

Most people don't understand or appreciate how much science has done for them. Anybody living in the United States or any industrialized country owes their lives to science and all it has brought us. Because of science millions if not billions of lives have been saved thanks to medical advancements that have cured diseases like polio and smallpox and millions more can survive thanks to lower infant morality. Because of science our civilization has an abudnence of food that is unsurpassed compared to any other time in history and because of science our understanding of how nature and the cosmos work has been greatly expanded. Everytime someone is able to eat ample food, drink clean water, or heal with modern medicine they are indebted to the advances made by countless men of science who used their reason and ingenuity to further our knowledge and create new ways to live and survive.

 

And yet despite all science has given civilization, there are those who seek to undermine it with age old superstition and dogma. These people feel so threatened by the advancements science has made they are willing to undo it and all the good it does just so they can keep their age old beliefs. Chief among these anti-science zealots are those calling themselves 'creation scientists.' Yet it would be an insult to real scientists everywhere to call these people scientists because what they do isn't science. It is just another way for them to push their religous beliefs on people and by disguising it as science they try to get a certain level of legitimacy, which is impossible because they completely ignore the tenants of science.

 

These creation scientists actually believe that the stories in the bible are literally true. They believe that the world was created by a supernatural being and that there was a global flood that only one man survived by building a single boat that housed two of every animal. They genuinely believe that the entire world was destroyed by their 'loving god' and they can prove this with science even though all of their claims have been rejected by legitimate research. But this doesn't seem to bother them. They reject vast body of geological and fossil evidence, claiming it can be explained by their faulty reasoning and misconstrued, out of context, and often outrageous biblical interpretations. They openly admit that if any evidence or theory of any kind comes along that my counter what their old book of Judeo-Christian myths and legends says then it must be thrown out.

Ken Ham, founder of Answers in Genesis (or Answers in Magic would be a more accurate description), is a well-known creationists who claims to know the actual 'science' of creation, but his claims and methods are about as steeped in science as the story of Jack and the Beanstalk. His site openly admits in it's mission statement that "We proclaim the absolute truth and authority of the Bible with boldness." This basically destroyed their scientific credibility because it states they have their conclusion already and will only shape the facts to agree with it. And that is NOT science. That's nonsense.

Science works in the opposite direction. It takes evidence and draws conclusions of it and often new evidence comes along to change that conclusion. People used to believe demons caused disease, but new evidence came along in the form of scientific observation of bacteria and microbes that proved otherwise. But if Ken Ham's method were applied and the idea of demons causing a disease was assumed since the bible says nothing about bacteria and affirms that demons cause disease, that evidence would have to be thrown out because it contradicts his assertion. Imagine if germ theory had been thrown out and science was not able to develop an understanding of disease. Millions if not billions of people would have died from a lack of understanding of how to treat diseases like polio and smallpox. But at least people like Ken Ham would have felt comfortable that their faith was secure. It only cost millions of lives and countless suffering. Is that really worth it?

Another common claim people like Ken Ham and his cohorts Duane Gish of the Institute for Creation Research (which is also an oxymoron because they don't research anything but the bible) and convicted fraudster Kent Hovind (the man who loves to claim dinosaurs and man walked together) like to espouse is that they are looking at the same evidence, they are just interpreting it differently. This is also a bogus argument because their 'interpretation' is steeped in dogma that allows for supernatural forces to play a part in natural processes. And in science there can be no supernatural forces whatsoever, otherwise it is by definition not science. Science does not claim to have all the answers, but when it doesn't know something it admits it doesn't know. It doesn't claim to know saying their version of a supernatural entity is behind it all. It actually seeks to investigate the phenomenon and explain it through natural forces.

This is possibly the biggest crime creationists and other anti-science zealots commit. They stiffle human curiosity into looking into a phenomonon. Someone out there may have had the answers to these questions about the universe a long time ago, but because of zealots and dogmas they were afraid or unable to pursue their curiosity and their knowledge was lost. Dogma such as creationism and anything like it teaches people to be content with not knowing something and attibuting it to supernatural forces they can never grasp. It hinders creativity and the human mind itself. These dogmatic zealots are not scientists, they are tyrants of the human spirit.

And their reverence of scripture and age old text (not just the bible but books like the Quran and the Book of Mormon), tries to parade nonsense as science even when it has been thoroughly disproven. There are still people who believe in the geocentric model of the solar system, that is having the Earth at the center of the universe, because that's what the bible implies. And their arguments are even laid out int the following website:

Geocentric Earth Nonsense

Creationists fight so hard to get their views forced into schools in regards to evolution. Yet you don't see many trying to push the Geocentric aspect of their dogma on anybody yet. As Penn Jillette so eloquently put "I'm sure they're just thinking...one step at a time."

This is the ultimate irony. The beliefs and nonsense these creation science and anti-science zealots try to push on the public is known by many to be wrong and good science has debunked it time and again. So they actively seek the government to support them through use of force either through policy or monetary support. They know they can't win in the ligitmate arena so they have to use force and that shows just how flawed their principles are.

I take this time to rant against these anti-science dogmatic zealots parading around as real scientists because they really do undermine the foundations of modern civilizaton. They would have it that we reject that which has given us so much just so they could feel good and secure about their beliefs. They would gladly march us all back into the Dark Ages where medicine involved prayer and exorcism and anybody doing research that contradicted sacred scripture was imprisoned or put to death and where irrational superstition took precedence over reason. And they do it with a smile, not caring of how many people would suffer and die as a result. If there isn't a greater example of ture evil then I've never heard one. If they have such a big problem with science then they should move out of our modernized world and live in hut in the middle of nowhere farming with pick axes and hand tools, just as it was in the days of their sacred tales. Because if science is so bad and so anti-god, then they should practice what they preach.

This is a free society. People have a right to believe whatever they want to believe. But in the world of reason, if you're going to make a claim you must support it with evidence. And faith is not evidence. Faith is faith. Don't confuse the two. Otherwise you'll damage both and all of society, not just science and religion, will be undermined.