Difference between revisions of "Irreligion"

'''Irreligion''' is the absence of religion, or contempt of it, as well as worldliness, ungodliness, profaneness, and impiety.<ref name="Cooley">{{cite web|url = http://books.google.com/books?id=DsQVAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA330&dq=irreligion+definition&hl=en&ei=KEqvTa-WG-jp0gHD3O3ICw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDQQ6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q&f=false|title=Dictionary of English Language Exhibiting Orthography, Pronunciation and Definition of Words|publisher=[[Nabu Press]]|quote=''Irreligion'', ir-re-lij'-un, s. 26-7, 32. Absence of religion, or contempt of it; worldliness; unglodliness; profaneness; impiety. H., ''irreli''-gionist'' (one without r., or who despises it), s.90.|accessdate=2010-12-02}}</ref> It encompasses a variety of terms, including [[atheism]], [[agnosticism]], [[secular humanism]], as well as sectors of [[unaffiliation]].<ref name="Corrie E. Norman, Donald S. Armentrout">{{cite web|url = http://books.google.com/books?id=aHSqIWYQWjUC&pg=PA127&dq=unaffiliated+irreligious&hl=en&ei=YnOuTa6sKuPZ0QGM2J2QCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAjgK#v=onepage&q=unaffiliated%20irreligious&f=false|author=Arnold James Cooley|title=Religion in the Contemporary South: Changes, Continuities, and Contexts|publisher=[[University of Tennessee Press]]|quote=Unaffiliated persons are not necessarily hostile to religion or even irreligious. Yet, as the proportion of unaffiliated persons grows, it will be increasingly difficult to assume that there is a religious base, such as Reed's orthodox Protestant consensus, supporting southern culture.|accessdate=2010-12-02}}</ref>  

A comprehensive study by [[Harvard University]] professor [[Robert Putnam]] found that religious people are more charitable than their irreligious counterparts.<ref name="Relgion & Charity">{{cite web|url = http://pewforum.org/Religion-News/Religious-people-make-better-citizens-study-says.aspx|title =Religious people make better citizens, study says |publisher = [[Pew Research Center]]|quote=The scholars say their studies found that religious people are three to four times more likely to be involved in their community. They are more apt than nonreligious Americans to work on community projects, belong to voluntary associations, attend public meetings, vote in local elections, attend protest demonstrations and political rallies, and donate time and money to causes -- including secular ones. At the same time, Putnam and Campbell say their data show that religious people are just "nicer": they carry packages for people, don't mind folks cutting ahead in line and give money to panhandlers.|accessdate = 2007–10–18}}</ref><ref name="Relgion and Charity">{{cite web|url = http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-11-15-column15_ST_N.htm|title =Religious people are 'better neighbors'|publisher = [[USA Today]]|quote=However, on the other side of the ledger, religious people are also "better neighbors" than their secular counterparts. No matter the civic activity, being more religious means being more involved. Take, for example, volunteer work. Compared with people who never attend worship services, those who attend weekly are more likely to volunteer in religious activities (no surprise there), but also for secular causes. The differences between religious and secular Americans can be dramatic. Forty percent of worship-attending Americans volunteer regularly to help the poor and elderly, compared with 15% of Americans who never attend services. Frequent-attenders are also more likely than the never-attenders to volunteer for school and youth programs (36% vs. 15%), a neighborhood or civic group (26% vs. 13%), and for health care (21% vs. 13%). The same is true for philanthropic giving; religious Americans give more money to secular causes than do secular Americans. And the list goes on, as it is true for good deeds such as helping someone find a job, donating blood, and spending time with someone who is feeling blue. Furthermore, the "religious edge" holds up for organized forms of community involvement: membership in organizations, working to solve community problems, attending local meetings, voting in local elections, and working for social or political reform. On this last point, it is not just that religious people are advocating for right-leaning causes, although many are. Religious liberals are actually more likely to be community activists than are religious conservatives.|accessdate = 2007–10–18}}</ref> The study revealed that forty percent of [[service of worship|worship service]] attending Americans volunteer regularly to help the poor and elderly as opposed to 15% of Americans who never attend services.<ref name="Relgion & Charity">{{cite web|url = http://pewforum.org/Religion-News/Religious-people-make-better-citizens-study-says.aspx|title =Religious people make better citizens, study says |publisher = [[Pew Research Center]]|quote=The scholars say their studies found that religious people are three to four times more likely to be involved in their community. They are more apt than nonreligious Americans to work on community projects, belong to voluntary associations, attend public meetings, vote in local elections, attend protest demonstrations and political rallies, and donate time and money to causes -- including secular ones. At the same time, Putnam and Campbell say their data show that religious people are just "nicer": they carry packages for people, don't mind folks cutting ahead in line and give money to panhandlers.|accessdate = 2007–10–18}}</ref><ref name="Relgion and Charity">{{cite web|url = http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-11-15-column15_ST_N.htm|title =Religious people are 'better neighbors'|publisher = [[USA Today]]|quote=However, on the other side of the ledger, religious people are also "better neighbors" than their secular counterparts. No matter the civic activity, being more religious means being more involved. Take, for example, volunteer work. Compared with people who never attend worship services, those who attend weekly are more likely to volunteer in religious activities (no surprise there), but also for secular causes. The differences between religious and secular Americans can be dramatic. Forty percent of worship-attending Americans volunteer regularly to help the poor and elderly, compared with 15% of Americans who never attend services. Frequent-attenders are also more likely than the never-attenders to volunteer for school and youth programs (36% vs. 15%), a neighborhood or civic group (26% vs. 13%), and for health care (21% vs. 13%). The same is true for philanthropic giving; religious Americans give more money to secular causes than do secular Americans. And the list goes on, as it is true for good deeds such as helping someone find a job, donating blood, and spending time with someone who is feeling blue. Furthermore, the "religious edge" holds up for organized forms of community involvement: membership in organizations, working to solve community problems, attending local meetings, voting in local elections, and working for social or political reform. On this last point, it is not just that religious people are advocating for right-leaning causes, although many are. Religious liberals are actually more likely to be community activists than are religious conservatives.|accessdate = 2007–10–18}}</ref> Moreover, religious individuals are more likely than non-religious individuals to volunteer for school and youth programs (36% vs. 15%), a neighborhood or civic group (26% vs. 13%), and for health care (21% vs. 13%).<ref name="Relgion & Charity">{{cite web|url = http://pewforum.org/Religion-News/Religious-people-make-better-citizens-study-says.aspx|title =Religious people make better citizens, study says |publisher = [[Pew Research Center]]|quote=The scholars say their studies found that religious people are three to four times more likely to be involved in their community. They are more apt than nonreligious Americans to work on community projects, belong to voluntary associations, attend public meetings, vote in local elections, attend protest demonstrations and political rallies, and donate time and money to causes -- including secular ones. At the same time, Putnam and Campbell say their data show that religious people are just "nicer": they carry packages for people, don't mind folks cutting ahead in line and give money to panhandlers.|accessdate = 2007–10–18}}</ref><ref name="Relgion and Charity">{{cite web|url = http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-11-15-column15_ST_N.htm|title =Religious people are 'better neighbors'|publisher = [[USA Today]]|quote=However, on the other side of the ledger, religious people are also "better neighbors" than their secular counterparts. No matter the civic activity, being more religious means being more involved. Take, for example, volunteer work. Compared with people who never attend worship services, those who attend weekly are more likely to volunteer in religious activities (no surprise there), but also for secular causes. The differences between religious and secular Americans can be dramatic. Forty percent of worship-attending Americans volunteer regularly to help the poor and elderly, compared with 15% of Americans who never attend services. Frequent-attenders are also more likely than the never-attenders to volunteer for school and youth programs (36% vs. 15%), a neighborhood or civic group (26% vs. 13%), and for health care (21% vs. 13%). The same is true for philanthropic giving; religious Americans give more money to secular causes than do secular Americans. And the list goes on, as it is true for good deeds such as helping someone find a job, donating blood, and spending time with someone who is feeling blue. Furthermore, the "religious edge" holds up for organized forms of community involvement: membership in organizations, working to solve community problems, attending local meetings, voting in local elections, and working for social or political reform. On this last point, it is not just that religious people are advocating for right-leaning causes, although many are. Religious liberals are actually more likely to be community activists than are religious conservatives.|accessdate = 2007–10–18}}</ref> Nevertheless, the study found that religious people are somewhat less tolerant of free speech and dissent than were non-religious people.<ref name="Relgion and Charity 2">{{cite web|url = http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-11-15-column15_ST_N.htm|title =Religious people are 'better neighbors'|publisher = [[USA Today]]|quote=On the one hand, religious Americans are somewhat less tolerant of free speech and dissent.|accessdate = 2007–10–18}}</ref>