The Christian Right could be irrelevant by 2024

We know now that the core of Trump’s voter base is the white evangelical demographic, and we know the issues with it: the main underlying drive of fear, the us-vs.-them mentality, the easy brainwashing due to being conditioned from childhood to mindlessly obey authority and believe lies, the anti-intellectualism, the false worldview generated from the pulpit and from the right-wing noise machine, the sexism, racism and many other bigotries, the authoritarianism, the “prosperity gospel” worship of wealth and the wealthy, the opposition to equality, freedom and democracy. They’re even talking about Trump being a God-sent king, so perhaps we have to add embrace of criminality, treason and sexual predation.

But it appears the numbers of white evangelicals are dwindling enough that they might become irrelevant as a political force as soon as 2024, and direct opposition to their toxic worldview is being led by an increasingly strong and vocal movement of their own disaffected youth: the Exvangelicals.

Nina Burleigh, Newsweek, Dec. 13, 2018:

The numbers are stark: Twenty years ago, just 46 percent of white evangelical Protestants were older than 50; now, 62 percent are above 50. The median age of white evangelicals is 55. Only 10 percent of Americans under 30 identify as white evangelicals. The exodus of youth is so swift that demographers now predict that evangelicals will likely cease being a major political force in presidential elections by 2024.

One of these demographers is Robert Jones, who heads up the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) and published a book in 2017 entitled The End of White Christian America. Jones, Burleigh writes,

…has tracked what he calls a “stair-steps downward trajectory of white Christian presence in the electorate.” In 1992, when Bill Clinton was elected, 73 percent of the electorate was white and Christian. By 2012, that number was 53 percent. “If current trends hold steady, 2024 will be a watershed year—the first American election in which white Christian voters do not constitute a majority of voters.”

See the Dem side of the new House of Representatives? That’s the long-term future of American politics.

While the older cohort of the Christian Right is aging and dying out, the younger is abandoning it due to being fed up with hypocrisy and bigotry. Burleigh, as well as providing an overview of Christian Right history, presents the stories of three young men who are now leaders in the Exvangelical movement: Blake Chastain, whose podcast “Exvangelical” gave the movement its name, felt his church’s support of the Iraq War conflicted with biblical teachings. Jason Desautels left his after his preacher mis-blamed the Oklahoma City bombing on Muslims and didn’t apologize when the truth came out. Alex Camire left his church after his mother was demonized by his pastor for her alcoholism and his horizons were broadened by a secular education; his pastor’s endorsement of Trump sealed the deal, exemplifying Burleigh’s point that the Trump phenomenon, while it did not start the Exvangelical exodus, certainly hastened it.


http://churchandstate.org.uk/2019/11/the-christian-right-could-be-irrelevant-by-2024/

 

I am white, male, straight, Christian and generally conservative but I would be hard pressed to find anyone who genuinely believes me as radical, evil or dangerous. And while reading your very anti “me” views, I still fail to discover how I am a honest threat to your America as you claim.

 

If you believe in one myth you can easily believe another, like Trump being a saviour

 

The heartbreaking part of this statement is that the left is completely blind to this new and in your face level of bigotry that they have introduced in recent years. The level of bigotry targeted toward people like myself and @CoinBlazer is unprecedented. What’s scary is that it is wholly embraced and accepted by the left.... Helping your fellow man through the church is an abomination while spewing forth hatred toward folks that do so is entirely acceptable. Wonder how long before bibles are banned from bookstore shelves?

 

wrong

Study: Atheists are nicer to Christians than Christians are to Atheists

Study: Atheists are nicer to Christians than Christians are to Atheists (churchandstate.org.uk)

A study published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology provides evidence that atheists behave more fairly towards Christians than Christians behave towards atheists.

The Independent reports:

Atheists are more generous toward Christians than Christians are toward them, a new study has claimed.

Researchers at Ohio University asked participants to share monetary rewards with partners in a version of the “dictator game”, in which one person had no power to affect the division of the bounty.

When atheists were told of their partner’s religious beliefs, they “behaved impartially toward ingroup and outgroup partners,” the study’s authors wrote in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.

However, “Christians consistently demonstrated an ingroup bias”.

Lead author of the study, Colleen Cowgill, explained to PsyPost: “The rise of the so-called ‘New Atheists’ about a decade ago coupled with the ongoing ‘culture wars’ between religious and secular groups in the United States has led atheists as a population to gain an unprecedented level of visibility in this country in recent years, even as their prevalence has only incrementally increased. This has sparked a particular interest in anti-atheist prejudice research in social psychology.”

In 2017 a study in Canada found that a majority (76%) of people did not believe being religious made someone a better citizen. And more than half of those polled believed faith did more harm than good. In Britain, fewer than a quarter of people believe religion is a force for good.

Sam Harris offers a detailed explanation of why he feels morality based on the Christian God is lacking.

(4) Morality and the Christian God (Sam Harris) - YouTube

 

Being Christian does not make me a better citizen. Nor does it make me a pariah to the Gen-X generation.

 

Atheism is a religion like all others. They have there belief systems, prophets, and theologians. Sam Harris is their version of Thomas Aquinas, and Richard Dawkins can be Calvin. They have no deity and "what's next" is a fade to black. Their moral beliefs are based on Jewish/Christian/Western values but won't admit it. It is not unusual for an emerging religion to borrow from past religions. Just ask them where some portions of the old testaments originated and they will confirm my last statement.

This is a competing religion, so tolerance is paramount. It is relatively new, so they are in their initial evangelical phase which leads to some fiery rhetoric and to the level of bigotry that you are seeing. As long as they remain true to their core beliefs, tolerance and reason should mature into a primary tenant of their faith. Until then, watch your back.

 

and "not collecting stamps" is a hobby.

 

This whole discussion is like two ships passing on a moonless night, in heavy fog, in different oceans, while the entire crew is temporarily blinded. In other words, you are talking about completely different things. How about a modicum of clarity?

One side of the argument only sees an attack on their Christian beliefs while the other side of the argument sees Christianity as a monolithic religion. I think that the OP even jumps from the subgroup of Evangelicals to the broader 70% of white Americans that consider themselves Christian and doesn't skip a beat.

The issue here isn't Christianity or even Evangelicals, it is religious belief systems that are far outside of their lane and finding themselves driving down Pennsylvania Avenue. Evangelicals stand out because they are fundamentalists and being fundamentalists, they arc towards extreme viewpoints. They see their place as front and center in the political arena rather than in the confines of their houses of worship. They invite the criticism they draw and wear it as a badge of honor and at the same time, they get to play the victims of the oppressed anti-religion crowd a.k.a. the atheists. Must be nice to have it both ways eh?

The fact is that Evangelicals are the most vocal, the most political, and the largest (formally) religious group in politics in decades. I believe that atheists, agnostics, and other regions have a legitimate concern about the influence of fundamentalists on the secular government of this country. I'm sure that these fundamentalists feel that they have an absolute right to build the world in the image they want to see it. But here is the problem. This is still and always has been a secular government. Religious beliefs are outside of the realm of our collective governance. We are not now nor have we ever been a Theocracy.

Given that there is a wall that separates church and state, there are those that would tear down that wall and install themselves as the religious and moral authority of this country. They would ban other belief systems, draft laws based on biblical fantasies, and worst of all, be the sole voice of the ever silent omnipotent supreme being. In other words, absolute power.

While some see the pushback on Christianity, I see it as Christianity pushing it's way into my government where it clearly does not belong. And I think that many young Evangelicals have also seen this happening and are uncomfortable with the direction their parents are headed causing them to flee in large numbers from a corrupt belief system. Isn't it the bible that says, A man reaps what he sows? Evangelicals should have read that part a little closer.

 

The term literally means, anti-theism as in opposition to theism. That is why I would never call myself an Atheist. I don't like definitions that are defined as what they are not. There should be a separate term for those that don't want to take a Bronze Age belief system as their spiritual guidance north star. Something not defined in opposition to something else. Like Realists or Rationalists or Reasonists.

 

I have long viewed statements like this as passively aggressive. Your point is well founded. Our forefathers had to foresight to recognize a potential problem and implemented separation of church and state in our founding documents. They also wrote those documents as documents founded on God and scripture. For the record, I see evangelicals as a pariah to government. They mix as well as oil and water. As a simple exercise, I asked Google how much of America considers itself Christian and the result according to Google is 65%. While that makes no never mind, it is a fact that those of us that live by faith have been pushed into a corner. When I have nine little league ball players that want to pray before a game but the tenth player is offended, we do not pray before a game.

Again, separation of church and state is a founding principal and I would surmise that most Christians are more like me and would keep their faith separate from our government. But you will never dominate an argument by demeaning the opposition. I am not a corrupt Christian.... And neither is my faith.

 

So I guess that you are saying that you are an Evangelical? On a personal level, I couldn't care less what people choose to believe within the confines of their own houses of worship. Be it God, Mohammed, Satan, or a teapot orbiting the sun. That is your business as far as I am concerned. And I think that you and I agree that keeping religion out of politics is a wonderful thing. That much we have in common. But you can't be blind to the inroads the Evangelicals have been making into the political arena since the "moral majority" has been a force in politics. A little history is: The Moral Majority, American political organization that was founded in 1979 by Jerry Falwell, a religious leader and televangelist, to advance conservative social values. Although it disbanded in 1989, the Moral Majority helped to establish the religious right as a force in American politics.

My complaint, observation, or discomfort is with those that would ignore what their religious leaders are doing and instead complain that they are being pushed into a corner and if the rest of us push back, we are the ones that are the aggressors here. We aren't forcing our religious values into your government. Some of us have no religious values. Some of us don't want to see our religious values as part of the political system. But Evangelicals are actively aggressive on several social issues and a huge force for social change based on their religious beliefs. I don't really care what they believe as long as their beliefs don't make it into my secular government policies.

 

To me the definition of evangelical is spreading the news of Christ. While I do not stand on street corners with a bible in my hand or demand that my staff adhere to my Christian views, I will certainly share that Gospel with you.... If you ask me to. By that definition, yes I am evangelical. However in recent years the word has been twisted into a political definition of rabid extremists that choose to force their views on others. They are not evangelical in my view. They are extremists and I abhor all extremists regardless of the flag they choose to fly. Any manner of the modern incarnation of extremists have no tolerance for anything other than their own view. I’ll point out all the references to meat eating slobs that are continually posted on this forum. Anyone that chooses not to live on a vegetarian diet is beneath him and he has said so an occasion after occasion..... Our nation is currently dominated by extremist views. Everybody is correct and everyone has their own soapbox. And none have the time or tolerance for views other than their own. That is our our country’s current cancer. And it is eating this nation from the inside out.

 

Let me disabuse you of this mistaken etymology. Looking at the word, we see two components. The privative particle "a", which essentially reverses or negates the stem "theos" -- "god". The word atheist means literally "without god". Just as apolitical means "without politics" (reference).

It does not mean "anti-theism", since the root of "theism" is again "theos" -- god, not religion. Nor does the privative "a" mean "anti".

I can understand that you might prefer to disassociate yourself from some of the more vocal atheists who are in fact anti-religion, but I think you are mistaken when you blame the word itself.

 

Technically you're right but

Technically, you're right, but I was referring to the colloquial use of the word.

 

I guess you were using the colloquial form of "literally" in your original post too then

 

I do agree that Dominionists and their fellow travellers are a pernicious element in the society of the United States. Their lies about history and their desire to establish a theocratic regime are completely at odds with the principles on which the country was founded. If the taste of success that the twice-impeached president gave them is their last, so much the better. Let's see them try to elect Mike Pompeo.

 

Don't make me ground you young man.

 

I've heard it said that "Christianity is the leading cause of Atheism".

I agree.

 

Yep... It’s a mighty good thing we have a thirty year old internet to make us all smart enough to deny the 2000 years of wisdom written in that silly fairy tale book called the Bible.