Agreed. Although it seems that the religious folks may be the ones sounding the alarm.
If indeed we can see that civil society is at risk down the road with secularism possibly being a contributor towards that unwanted outcome, we ALL ought to at least take notice and determine the risk factors and then look at what can be done.
As it is, civil society seems to have deteriorated somewhat even at this juncture. Is it the gradual decline in religiosity along with other factors?
It’s worth exploring. There may be some other hard data sets to look out there that some here might find more reliable than that referred to in the Deseret News article. But this particular data set is a bit disconcerting.
Regards,
MG
I agree it is worth exploring, and I would submit that both secular and religious folk are to blame. Religious folk because many of the leaders among them and many average parishioner are ignorant and extreme in their wayward views and behavior. Giving religion a bad name, failing to justify fervor with substance and value, they have people shrugging and moving away from religion. It ceases to be a harbor and generator of civil society.
How do you see secular folks as being worthy of blame?
How moral was it for all the religious baby boomers to support the insurrection that tried to literally storm the capitol and overthrow a democratic election?
Their religion didn't seem to guide their compass North in that case. Their compass was pointed directly at Trump - right or wrong. If religious morality failed them at such a crucial time, what does it matter if GenZ doesn't attend church every week?
MG is effectively confirming that religion and rightwing politics are one and the same.
Not at all. For some folks that is obviously true.
How do you see secular folks as being worthy of blame?
Regards,
MG
When they give us this day our daily bread, they call it Creamed Chipped Beef on Toast rather than the time-honored name used at BYU. It is the inclusion of right-wing politics that gives it that distinctive flavor. The secularists want to use stinky tofu or durian fruit as an ungodly substitute for that which we have come to treasure.
It would seem that the firm bedrock principle and truth that you’re looking for to reliably pass on would be to ‘practice altruistic behavior out of love for their neighbor and concern for their well being’.
Yes, that is absolutely true. But my concern is that the younger generations are now being conditioned to see moral relativism as being their god. It is less likely that over time the same values taught within religions will continue to be passed on from generation to generation.
MG 2.0 has already told those of us who are not people of faith that we are the agents of the adversary. He has staked me and others out as his enemies in the existential battle he imagines is going on. That's not building civil society.
I do think that atheism and secular humanism are an enemy of religious faith and ultimately civil society as we have known it.
Regards,
MG
Your own words. Your argument on this thread you started is a conflation of conservative politics and religious intolerance towards the irreligious. It isn't that you disagree with those who do not believe. You see this as an existential threat and repeatedly claim in this thread part of that threat is due to government being the institution of choice over church which you describe in very rightwing ways.
Taking a step back, much of the focus in this thread has been on Gen Z's attributes and behaviors. But what about the other side of the equation? What constitutes "civil society"?
There are hundreds of millions of "less government" types who still don't think that relying on a democratic government to make laws that rectify justice and fairness issues is dangerous. Dangerous?
You have got to love the irony of a member of the mega rich LDS church, which is hoarding billions of dollars, arguing that secular people are less charitable.
After 10 pages, here's what I'm getting, mostly from the religionist side - simplified, of course:
there's a growing problem in society that would be fixed if more younger people come to Christ and/or participate in religious activity of some sort that promotes community values of charity/giving beyond one’s self
here are some examples of how one religious individual has promoted community values of charity/giving beyond one’s self
that religious person would likely have done the same if he had not been religious
however, the examples that people see (the "fruits", if you like) of religion seem to be putting people off religion
somehow, all of this is the fault of the non-religious
anyway, non-religious people are not as good as religious people, because non-religious people don't have fear of god to keep them in line
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details. Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
Taking a step back, much of the focus in this thread has been on Gen Z's attributes and behaviors. But what about the other side of the equation? What constitutes "civil society"?
I’m currently watching the “Age of Easy Money” by Frontline, and let me tell you something. Morality and civil society is an illusion. The gravest sins aren’t being committed by irreligious GenZ’ers attending drag queen shows and getting tattoos. They’re being committed by Boomers in suits playing fast and loose with what is essentially the lives of sheep being fleeced.
Someone like MG, who can look at what his “church” is doing with their “sacred tithing funs” and only shrug, or worse clap happily, is so devoid of morality that it’s laughable. That old fool kvetching about a younger generation while his generation robs us blind with actions meant to keep us snowed is perfect. Just perfect.
- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
