Myth Busted: Religious People are Not Happier

Are religious people happier than atheists? It turns out that this statistic, while strictly true in America, is quite misleading. The deeper truth is far more interesting ... and it's a perfect case study in meme theory.

Tom Rees over at Epiphenom posted a fascinating new bit of data that just calls out for an explanation:

"Much is made of the apparent fact that religious people are happier and better adjusted than the non-religious. However, as regular readers of this blog will know, this is to a large extent an illusion. ... [If you dig deeper] you'll find that religion is only linked to happiness in countries where a lot of people are religious.

... Although non-religious people feel uncomfortable in religious countries, religious people have no problems living in non-religious countries.

In other words, religious societies reject and shun atheists, so naturally non-religious people are unhappy in these societies. But Dr. Rees makes an even deeper point: secular societies make religious people feel welcome, so there is no converse effect. In secular societies, everyone is equally happy.

The conclusion is inescapable: atheists and agnostics are unhappy in religious countries because of the religious people, whereas religious people do well in secular countries because they're made welcome. You can be an evangelical Christian in Sweden or Denmark, but it's hard to be an atheist in Turkey, Iran or even America.

It's very satisfying to deflate this myth. Religious bloggers and ministers love to crow about the fact that atheists and agnostics are unhappier than "the faithful." Now we can turn and point to them as the cause.

But while this solves one mystery, it presents us with a challenge: why is religion so hostile to atheism? A cultural factor like this that spans so many countries and cultures begs for a deeper analysis.

It's easy to find some superficial reasons for the hostility that atheists and agnostics feel. Maybe Christians aren't "hostile" but rather are doing atheists a favor by saving their souls from eternal damnation. Or maybe atheists are unhappy because humans naturally yearn for God's love, and the atheists won't accept that love. Or maybe atheists actually know God exists, and their unhappiness comes from the stress of having to deny the truth (I've been accused of this by readers).

I think we can dismiss these reasons out of hand. They're false and insulting.

The real reason for religion's anti-atheist hostility is because it's good for religion. Religions that foster hatred and hostility toward atheists are, simply put, better than religions that don't. And we use "better" here in the Darwinian sense.

One of the most fascinating facts about biology is that 99.99% of all species that ever existed are extinct today. If we merely look at the successes (for example, homo sapiens) without considering the failures (such as neanderthals), we're not being very good scientists. It's competition and death that drive evolution forward. In order for the more fit species to survive, the less fit species has to die. And in order to understand the survivors, we have to study the failures.

The same thing applies to the evolution of religions. We have to look at the ones that died along with the ones we know today. In the cultural-evolution or "memetic" way of thinking (the study of how ideas evolve and spread across society and down through history), religion isn't a set of distinct faiths, but rather is a great mass of competing ideas fighting for "survival of the fittest." At any point in history, there have been many thousands of religions around the world. Within each religion there are often hundreds of differing opinions and interpretations of the main ideas.

In order to survive, a particular idea has to spread across society and down through history. But that's no trivial task: there are plenty of others competing. At each generation, only the "fittest" ideas survive to be passed along. This is the primary driving force that shapes any one religion's beliefs as time passes. And it's also true between religions: eventually, the "fitter" religions steal away all the believers from the "weaker" religions, which die out and pass into the history books.

What makes one religion more "fit" than another? There are many factors indeed (that's why I wrote The Religion Virus), but it brings us back to today's topic.

Children are born atheists and must be indoctrinated early and thoroughly in order for their faith to stick. Atheism is a huge threat to that process. If a culture allows atheists in their midst, the children will be exposed to powerful and persuasive ideas (logic, science, rational thinking). These atheistic ideas challenge the faith-based dogma that the children have to learn. Children are much more likely to have weak faith or no faith if they are exposed to atheism. (See Teach the Children for more on this topic.)

Thus, hostility to atheism is a "good" trait for religions to have. A religion that persecutes atheists will be more successful than one that doesn't. As generations and centuries go by, it's almost inevitable that religion will become more and more hostile to atheism.

Atheists aren't really such a sorry, unhappy lot. It's religion's fault, and now we know why: it's good for religion to be hostile to atheism. Religions with a live-and-let-live attitude died out a long time ago. They're extinct, and we're left with the survivors, the "fittest" religions ... the ones that don't like atheists.

Tim Tebow, not God, Throws the Ball

What does it take to be a quarterback for an NFL team? It starts with a kid who is willing to put in thousands of hours in high school and all through college then into the big leagues. It takes inborn athleticism combined with a fast-thinking intelligence and relentless determination.

That's just to be on the team. To be a first-string quarterback, you have to be the best of the best.

Tim Tebow is such a man. He worked extraordinarily hard to get where he is ... which is why Tim Tebow's religion is a real shame. Christianity has stolen Tebow's pride. Instead of taking pride in his accomplishments, he gives the credit away to God. The simple fact is that it's Tebow throwing the ball, not God.

In less than a second or two, Tebow's mind absorbs the receiver's position, speed and direction, and on

So Sorry Your Dad Died – Too Bad He's Burning in Hell

Death is always sad, but it can bring out kind and comforting words from family and friends. These good wishes really do help us feel better. Whether it's a simple expression of sorrow, some shared tears, or an enlightening story, our friends' kind words help us accept death, cherish the memories, and get life going again.

Now it happens that most of my relatives and close friends aren't Christian. We're a broad assortment of Deists, pantheists, paganists, agnostics and atheists. There's hardly a Christian among us.

So what do Christians write in their condolences? "The peace of the Lord is on your father." Or, "Your mother is resting in Jesus' arms now."

I know they mean well. But if these Christians were true to their faith, they'd say, "So sorry that your loved one is now being tortured with

Christian Apologist: Skepticism Caused by Hurt from Church

Christian apologists just can't stand the idea that we skeptics actually have good reasons to not believe their mythology. To them, Christian theology is so obviously true that anyone who doesn't believe must have some other reason. If someone is a non-believer, then they must have been beaten by a nun, molested by a priest, shunned for homosexuality, or hurt in some other dastardly fashion by a Christian or by the church.

It just can't be, they say, that someone actually rejects Christianity itself.

The latest salvo of this nature comes from Christian apologist and author Dr. Alex McFarland, whose new book, 10 Answers for Skeptics, purports to have statistics showing that most skeptics were driven away from their faith by bad experiences. In an interview with the Christian Post, McFarland said,

"Through nearly a year of research and numerous personal interviews, my goal was to really get 'inside the mind of the skeptic.' The most common type of skeptics I meet are wounded skeptics. They have been hurt by church, religion, or by another Christian."

The problem with Dr. McFarland's statement is that like so much of Christian apologetics, it uses flawed logic. McFarland makes the reader think that bad experiences caused the skepticism. More importantly, McFarland seems to think that if you can cure the hurt and heal the damage, the ex-Christian skeptics will all come flooding back to their former faith.

McFarland is implying that skeptics are really Christians in their hearts, and it's only the hurt and their pride that have separated them from God.

This is completely wrong.

These ex-Christian skeptics have had their eyes opened. The hurt they suffered

Obama: Leave God in Pledge and on Money

"Under God" is going to stay in the Pledge of Allegiance for a while.

Last month a petition to President Obama to remove "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance was signed by over 20,000 American citizens. It's clear that this is a minority opinion in America, but protecting minorities is what the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights is all about.

Now the White House has made the administration's position clear: God should stay in our Pledge and on our currency. I know for a fact that regardless of the President's feelings about separation of church and state, he'd be committing political suicide to endorse anything that took God out of our government. That's just politics.

The heart of the White House response is this:

"A sense of proportion should also guide those who police the boundaries between church and state. Not every mention of God in public is a breach to the wall of separation - context matters.

That’s why President Obama supports the use of the words “under God” in our Pledge of Allegiance and “In God we Trust” on our currency.

So, we have to look at this petition as just one more step on a long road.

Below is the whole text the email I received from the White House.

"Ministerial Exception" - A Solution to Legalized Discrimination

The Christian Science Monitor has cast its vote on whether churches are allowed to discriminate on the basis of faith. Their answer, not surprisingly, is "yes":

"On Wednesday, the Supreme Court hears the case of a Christian schoolteacher fired in a dispute over a disability and church doctrine. The justices should be careful about allowing government to judge a faith's teachings when it is charged with discrimination."

(The fourth-grade teacher was fired because she took a disability leave, was asked to resign, and then filed a discrimination lawsuit rather that using the employer's Christ-based dispute-resolution process.)

The Monitor goes on to explain that some religions are so bizarre

Why Atheism will Replace Religion, and Why Capitalism Cares

Here's a question that's bugged me for years: why aren't all Christians strong socialists? As Carl Gibson at HuffPost wrote the other day:

Christians would do well to vote for those who actually practice what they preach. While Perry and Paul demand cuts to public programs and health care for the uninsured, President Obama is finding his inner Luke and asking the richest Americans to share their possessions to help lessen the burden of deficit reduction already on the shoulders of working families.

If Jesus demanded a socialistic approach to helping the poor, then why are evangelical Christians almost universally against socialized medicine, unemployment insurance and a decent Social Security system?

Because it's bad for religion, that's why.

Nigel Barber did some fascinating research about atheism. He wanted to know why atheism is so strongly correlated with wealth. Along the way, he discovered the fascinating answer: It's security, not wealth, that drives people to religion.

Do It! Sign the Petition to take "Under God" Out of the Pledge!

OK all you dilettantes and dabblers, you casual readers and sideline critics ... it's time to get off your butts and do something important! This will take you less than five minutes – three if you're quick – and it will make a difference.

Sign the White House Petition to remove "Under God" from the Pledge.

If you're a fellow blogger, put this link on your site too! (http://wh.gov/g0T)

The number of signers already blasted past the original goal of 5,000. Can we get 100,000? 500,000? A million atheists standing up for their rights? It could happen! But it depends on you.

You'll have to spend about thirty seconds typing your name and email to create an account on whitehouse.gov, then wait a few seconds for the

Bad Christian Logic: Even the Smart Ones Do It

Albert Mohler may be one of the most intelligent humans on the planet. If Mohler weren't a Christian literalist, he might also be one of the best scientists or historians alive today. Sadly, his mind has been hijacked by the religion virus, which seems to have rendered him incapable of true logical thinking.

Mohler's most recent article is about Genesis, and asks whether Adam and Eve were literally the ancestors of all humans. He builds up a very powerful chain of logical arguments, based on history, philosophy and Biblical evidence: if Adam and Eve weren't real, then Christianity falls apart. Jesus' sacrifice would have been meaningless. Without Adam and Eve, there would be no original sin, and no need for anyone to accept Jesus as their savior.

To a scientist or historian, this is a beautiful chain of deductions, the sort of stuff that all scholars aspire to:

Adam and Eve --> The Fall --> God's curse --> original sin
  --> Jesus' sacrifice --> redemption --> Christianity

It's a very nice bit of scholarship so far. But ... then Mohler makes a terrible mistake.

A real scientist or historian would look for independent evidence for Adam and Eve to prove they existed, and then follow the chain of logic forward to prove the conclusion (that Christianity is true). But Mohler does the reverse! He claims that Christianity is true, and then follows the logic backwards to "prove" that the story of Adam and Eve is true.

It's an embarrassing intellectual error.

He also asserts that all true Christians must reach this same conclusion. Mohler claims that

Atheist Group Rips out Bible Pages to Demonstrate Morality

I usually start my day by scanning the news headlines looking for something good to blog about. Imagine my surprise this morning when I discovered that the Christian Post was ranting about the very same group that invited me as their monthly speaker this coming Thursday!

Bruce Gleason and the Backyard Skeptics of Orange County had a great idea. The Bible is full of immoral laws that no decent modern Christian or Jew would follow. Why not remove them from the Bible? For example:

Good News: Court Sides with Two Atheist Lawsuits

Life is keeping me busy today, so there's just time for a couple quick links. The first is a story about a Christian teacher who was ordered to remove a huge Christian poster from his math classroom:

Court says teacher has no right to banners referring to God

The court originally ruled in favor of the teacher, but the school district appealed and the District Court in San Francisco reversed the decision. The teacher now has to pay the school's legal fees.

The second story is a follow-up: remember James Corbett, teacher extraordinaire? He made the mistake of treating Christianity like any other topic, open to analysis and criticism in his history classes. He was sued by a Christian student who claimed Corbett had violated his right to religious freedom.

Last month we got the good news that the Appeals Court finally sided with Corbett. The Court ruled that Corbett's lessons in the classroom were not against the law. The ruling was somewhat technical, but still a big victory for education and good teachers.

Evangelical Scientists: Creationism is Wrong!

At last, some serious conservative scholars who are also respected evangelical Christians are coming "out of the closet" regarding Creationism. They don't believe it. According to a fascinating NPR story, they're admitting that the Genesis account of creation can't possibly be right. To believe that we all descended from Adam and Eve "would be against all the genomic evidence that we've assembled over the last twenty years."

And over at BioLogos, there's a long blog about a Christianity Today story that lays out the position

New Teenie Fad: Become an Exorcist!

Teen girls are known for fashions and fads. The hottest new line of cosmetics, the latest boy band, unzipped bluejeans that drive the boys crazy ... you never know what's going to be next. But exorcism?

"... if the forces of darkness start getting the upper hand, who should you call? Evangelist Reverend Bob Larson of Spiritual Freedom Churches International - and his remarkable school for exorcists. 'We have found that our female, teenage exorcists are particularly effective at curing the possessed,’ says Rev Larson, whose daughter Brynne is a supernaturally talented exorcist."

Brynne and her teen girlfriends, whose ages range from fifteen to nineteen, are having the time of their young lives. They get to tie their victims clients to chairs, then shout words like "Lucifer!" and "Beelzebub!" They're taught about curse breaking and chanting. Their clients yell, vomit, and even go into convulsions! What great fun.

And they're out to save us!

"I think Harry Potter and Twilight are instigators of evil,’ Savannah says. ‘They nullify morality and just serve to hook people in with evil.

I'm sure it's all great fun! And golly, they're probably the envy of all the other girls – what could be cooler than being an exorcist?

The trouble is, what they're really doing is medical quackery. These are nothing more than

Catholics Ban Girl Scout Membership

Pity the poor Girl Scouts of America (GSA). They've been criticized heavily for discriminating against atheists, agnostics, humanists, Muslims, Buddhists and other non-monotheistic girls. But unlike the Boy Scouts, who have stuck to their old discriminatory habits, the GSA modified its pledge to allow girls of all faiths ... as long as they have some faith (atheists are still not allowed).

But now they're getting hammered by Christian groups! Who would have expected that? Christians are banning their young girls from joining GSA, and the ringleader of this is the Roman Catholic Church itself.

The reason should be obvious: GSA has ties to Planned Parenthood, which provides resources on sex education to teens around the world. Yes, it's true. Girl Scouts of America is educating teen girls about their bodies! Can you imagine?

I should at least give the Roman Catholic Church credit for consistency. Their stance on abortion is unbending, and Planned Parenthood does provide abortions. I may vehemently disagree with the Church's moral position on abortion, but I can't blame them for enforcing it.

But other Christian groups are really going nuts. They have all sorts of crazy>

Mortality Sucks

I'm in Northern California helping out an older family member who needed some "maintenance" in the surgery room to fix bones that were wearing out.

It also happens that my wife and I love hiking and usually walk twenty to thirty miles every week. But between arthritis and tendinitis, it's getting hard to keep up the pace. I'm hobbling around today on damaged feet, and I'm going to have to take a rest for a week or so. This reminds me that I used to bicycle a lot but no longer can because of the surgery I had twelve years ago to fix my knees (which I damaged by overenthusiastic pedaling). Add to that the fact that my wife's younger brother died earlier this summer.

In other words, I'm feeling very mortal today. I'm face to face with pain, infirmity and death. My once-youthful body that could take all sorts of abuse and keep going is now betraying me and paying me back for all of the excesses of the past.

We only get a short seven to ten decades on this planet, and if we're lucky we can live five or six of them in excellent health. Am I done with the pain-free part? Now that I'm fifty-seven, is life going to be a constant struggle? Is my body, now past its prime breeding time, just running on genetic momentum with no real evolutionary purpose? I've done my evolutionary job after all – three great kids each share half of my genes. Am I now evolutionarily irrelevant? Is it time to quietly curl up and die to make room for the next generation?

Nah. Wrong answer. Giving up isn't in my genes.

The problem with being an atheist is that

Gov. Rick Perry Fail

Remember how when you were young, there was always that one nerdy kid in the class that nobody really liked? Nobody wanted to go to his birthday party. But you and maybe one other kid felt bad for him so you went. Or maybe your mom made you go. He was so glad and thankful that somebody showed up that it was embarrassing. All you wanted was to get out of there.

Governor Rick Perry held his big prayer party (the "Response") on Saturday, and sadly, only one of his invited guests showed up. Oh sure, they had a whole bunch of evangelical Christians there, praying and singing. But Perry invited all forty-nine state governors to come pray with him, and only one showed up (Kansas Governor Sam Brownback). Just one. Just like that kid in elementary school.

Governor Perry and his supporters are trying to paint "The Response" as a big success. They had 20,000 to 30,000 evangelicals in attendance. They had people all over

Amy Winehouse: Rabbi Raises Ugly AA Claims

The tragic death of Amy Winehouse has once made the Alcoholics Anonymous you-need-God myth raise its ugly head once again. It's like a monster that won't die.

You know the myth I'm talking about: the only way to recover from addiction is to turn yourself over to a "higher power." Unfortunately for addicts everywhere, study after study has shown that AA doesn't work, and actually hinders recovery for most people. (I've written about AA before; see Christian Shocker: God-Based AA Program Harms Alcoholics.)

Here's what Rabbi Shais Taub had to say over at Huffington Post:

"In a grim sort of way, the only "news" to me about Amy's death is the date. After all, what really could have stopped this from happening? The only time I have ever seen recovery in a case like Amy's is by an act of God. ... One of the axioms of recovery is that the addict is beyond human aide and that's why addicts need a "higher power" to live. You can call that hocus-pocus. I call it an everyday reality. There is no fact more real to me than the idea that no human power can stand up against the power of addiction."

Except for one thing: Rabbi Taub, you are wrong. Dead wrong. It is not an "axiom." It's a myth that's been

Norway Terrorist was NOT a Christian, and don't say he was

The bullets in the tragic massacre in Norway had barely stopped flying before the words "Christian terrorist" started spreading in news reports and the blogosphere.

• USA Today: Norway suspect sought 'Christian war' against Islam
• Huffington Post: The Face of Christian Terrorism?
• The Palestine Telegraph: Christian terrorist behind attacks in Norway
• Religion Dispatch: Is Norway's Suspected Murderer ... a Christian Terrorist?
• Deutsche Welle: Norway terror suspect believed to be a Christian fundamentalist

And the Christians were equally quick to disown the murderer:

Atheists and Christians Agree: The Internet is Killing Religion

For once I completely agree with a leading Christian apologist.

Christian minister and apologist Josh McDowell recently spoke at the International Christian Retail Show, where he told attendees that the Internet is the greatest threat to Christianity.

"The Internet has given atheists, agnostics, skeptics, the people who like to destroy everything that you and I believe, the almost equal access to your kids as your youth pastor and you have... whether you like it or not."

He goes on to cite many statistics showing just how influential the Internet has become. According to McDowell:

• The number of evangelical Christians who don't believe in absolute truth has jumped from 51 percent to 62 percent in 1994, then to 78 percent in 1999 and it now hovers at around 91 percent.
• Back in the good old (pre-Internet) days, if an agnostic or atheist wrote a book nobody would read it. But now the Internet has given atheist authors (that would be me...) access to these kids' minds.
• Ninety percent of sixteen-year-olds have viewed pornography. Among fifteen- to seventeen-year-olds, 59 percent of girls and 69 percent of boys say pornography is acceptable.

One of my favorite blog topics is why children have to be indoctrinated (infected) with religion at

Refuting the Atheist Professor vs the Christian Student

There's an embarrassing essay circulating around the Christian/theist world that claims to show a simple Christian student gets the better of an atheist professor of philosophy by turning the professor's own logic against him. I'm subscribed to a fairly popular Christian Facebook group (no, I didn't subscribe myself, but it is interesting), and someone posted this. I thought it was laughable, but sadly most of the members of this Christian discussion group seemed to think it was brilliant. I briefly refuted the essay and got lots of arguments, so I told them I'd do a whole blog showing how ridiculous the essay is.

It's a bit long, but it's important to read it because it illustrates what the secular/humanist/rational-thought community is up against when it comes to faith versus reason. (I fixed some typographical errors that were in the original so that it didn't distract from the main point). Here it is with my refutation. My first comment is