Five Solas Posted July 4, 2016 Author Posted July 4, 2016 8 minutes ago, Calm said: ... Ps: my husband thinks they were just having a debate on whether to have the B-2s there. It was a huge issue for the community. ... I remember when (early/mid 80's) there was a not dissimilar debate, but over MX missiles (a.k.a., the LGM-118 Peacekeeper), instead of B-2's. The Regan Administration wanted them in Southern Utah (I was living there at the time & well recall the fear and the controversy). Spencer W. Kimball didn't. Guess who won? NY Times on the subject, way back when--http://www.nytimes.com/1981/05/06/us/mormon-church-opposes-placing-mx-missile-in-utah-and-nevada.html Forgive the digression. ;0) --Erik
Popular Post 3DOP Posted July 4, 2016 Popular Post Posted July 4, 2016 On 6/26/2016 at 6:09 PM, Five Solas said: A large rainbow flag flies from the Space Needle today. We passed it on our way to church this morning and my 7 year-old asked about it. She’s already aware from school that a child can sometimes have two mommies or two daddies. And (with help from my wife) I explained that the flag represents gays or homosexuals and we should treat people the way we would want to be treated. Pride parades take place in major cities across the United States (and elsewhere) this time of year. And it got me thinking—many if not most LDS eschew urban living, preferring sub-urban lifestyles (where the sight of a rainbow flag is a good deal rarer). The LDS community within the Seattle city limits has been in gradual decline over the past couple decades, consolidating/closing wards (e.g., University 4th, the International Ward) while the city’s population has grown rapidly during this same period (meaning LDS per-capita in Seattle has been in a fairly steep decline). Interestingly, the North Seattle Stake has done away with the old ward numbering scheme and given their remaining wards neighborhood names approximate to their boundaries—and that illustrates a problem. With the exception of Magnolia (where a dedicated building has long supported a single neighborhood ward) and the three remaining "young single adult" wards that meet in the University of Washington LDS Institute building—everyone else from downtown to Northgate, Ballard to Sand Point is expected to pile into their cars and make the trip to the stake center each Sunday. The key word right there is “cars”—an essential & expected tool in suburbia, but people in the city increasingly don’t have them (parking alone can cost up to $300/month). And suffice it to say, mass transit accessibility wasn’t a primary concern for the location of the stake center. Pride parades may be the proverbial red herring. And Seattle may be a special case with zero application for the broader LDS religious community (some of you may hope so). But my question is this: Do you think there’s anything inherent in the LDS culture/religion that favors suburban lifestyles with its automobile dependency, relative conservatism, and other aspects of life associated with suburbs? --Erik PS. I love the city! Erik, What I would share is only anecdotal, but I think it illustrates that the phenomenon you raise isn't just an LDS problem. I suspect it is the same for any religious institution that adheres to traditional moral values and especially if they teach that it is a blessing to have more than one or two children. I go to Mass at a chapel in Portland, OR just down the road from you. We have been trying to find another location because our current property isn't big enough anymore. It is a nice problem to have and I am not complaining. I don't have the stats but it seems like we must have six infant baptisms to every funeral. There are so many babies. Three of my own grandchildren are under four years old. We still have some older singles who live in Portland city limits and some have been with us a long time and we know it will be painful for them if we need to move. However, there are many young people of marrying age who will only add to this trend of baptisms over funerals. None of these would seem to be inclined towards living in the city and we have got to make a decision some time in the next few years about how to proceed. An anlaysis of the parish demographics shows that there is not one school age child left in our parish who lives in the city of Portland where their family brings them to Mass! Not one. My conclusion is that nude bike rides and "keeping Portland weird" makes parents with large families uncomfortable. Why would they want to spend the extra money to live in a city that seems disdainful of Christian morality in general and hostile to having many children in particular? It has made the leadership of the parish consider moving the chapel to the suburbs at some point. There are aspects of city life that are very appealing to me too. I don't like the idea of religious people fleeing the cities. But sometimes I get tired of the billboards and bumper stickers that are constant reminders of how out of step I am with the city. I can't blame the young husbands and wives for starting out where it is much less expensive and where it seems more welcoming. 11
readstoomuch Posted July 4, 2016 Posted July 4, 2016 So I think 5solas is getting there. Lds are leaving the inner cities everywhere. Northwest, especially Seattle is very secular and politically correct. For young couples, the idea of not having a commute and high density living that is more green is very inviting. Buy some things at the farmers market and then longer trips by public transit for bigger loads of groceries. Public transit is not great in Seattle area. Actually much better in Salt Lake. Probably the best in the intermountain/northwest. Mission companion from avenues in Salt Lake told me that three wards in his building were downsized to two in 1981. That is the first time that I realized that the Church shrunk in some areas. I also realized that neighborhoods age and the areas that used to be great areas change and become less desirable. Some neighborhoods are able to revitalize them and give them a new lease on life. I have been to Seattle many times and have said that i am so,so,so,so glad that I am not trying to raise my kids in that area. I live in a Northwest suburb so I have been in all of the bigger cities and university towns in Oregon/Washington. Young people in the 20-30 age who leave the Church and become very tolerant of alternate lifestyles and progressive ideas seem to do better in the inner/big cities. 1
Kenngo1969 Posted July 4, 2016 Posted July 4, 2016 5 hours ago, readstoomuch said: So I think 5solas is getting there. Lds are leaving the inner cities everywhere. Northwest, especially Seattle is very secular and politically correct. For young couples, the idea of not having a commute and high density living that is more green is very inviting. Buy some things at the farmers market and then longer trips by public transit for bigger loads of groceries. Public transit is not great in ... Mission companion from avenues in Salt Lake told me that three wards in his building were downsized to two in 1981. ... The same thing happened in the same area in the early 2000s when I was a member of a ward in the area. Houses formerly occupied by families had been taken over by singles and young childless marrieds, so several wards were consolidated and/or had their boundaries realigned. Conversely, the opposite is happening where I'm living now in Northern Utah County: boundaries were realigned and, where I used to live in one ward, now a new ward has been created. While my work schedule mandates that I attend a different ward that skews older and has far fewer younger, child-rearing couples, my own ward largely is populated by young couples who have (or who are expecting, or who are planning to have) young children. The primary organization is, in Donald Trump's word, "yuge."
rodheadlee Posted July 4, 2016 Posted July 4, 2016 (edited) 17 hours ago, Five Solas said: Between this and what Bernard Gui mentioned about Tacoma area ward consolidations, I'm now realizing my mistake. I had *assumed* LDS ward closures/consolidations were a phenomena within the Seattle city boundaries and that LDS folks were merely moving into the adjacent suburbs. That isn't true. I was wrong. This is a Puget Sound regional story, not a Seattle story. LDS are leaving (or just maybe just quitting) across a much larger geographic area in the Pacific Northwest. Also, I must fess up--I previously understated the impact on the North Seattle Stake. I have since learned the Seattle University First ward dissolved in 2012. There are now only two wards remaining in the LDS Institute across the street from UW on 15th Ave NE, not three as I stated previously. That's 50% of YSA gone in a little over a decade, not 25%. Talk about not reaching/retaining Millennials! This is quite stunning. Please pardon my errors & let my thread continue. To recap the explanations for the LDS retreat thus far-- 2) Ideology (favored by Bernard Gui, rodheadlee, others). This merits further exploration. Can LDS really not bear to live in the vicinity of those with "uber-progressive" views? Seattle is good for families, but not "conservative families"? Aren't we all Americans? (Okay, a few of you reading this may not be.) What's really going on here? 3) Economy (I won't attribute this to a single poster, but you can figure it out if you read previous posts closely). This one requires some sensitivity, because I wouldn't suggest there's something inherent about LDS that prevents them from competing for housing in Seattle (and surrounding areas). Plenty of other groups can muster the means to live here, including, as Downtown Cornerstone Church (and many others) demonstrate, Evangelical Christians. IMO, LDS can too--if they want to. Nonetheless, the economics of city living vis-a-vis LDS should be explored further, since it's been brought up. Carry on. Please! --Erik PS. A WWII era B-25 just flew over my house (yes, I'm sitting outside on my back-yard deck again)! Nothing like the sound radial piston engines. All kinds of cool things down at Boeing Field this summer... :0) Hey if I could live anywhere I wanted to right now I would choose Sausalito. It's close enough to the city to visit but far enough away where I don't have to participate. I live where I do right now for economics. It's 7 miles to work. But to suggest either of us is less American for where we choose to live is outrageous. I would choose Alameda or Treasure Island but the condos are pushing out the boat slips and the billionaires will be pushing out the millionaires soon enough and it would still be 70 miles to work. It is really tough to get a live aboard slip anywhere in the USA, we are a second class citizen with few rights, you have to "know somebody" or have mega bucks and "be somebody". I suppose soon enough I'll be moving to Mexico. Utah doesn't have an ocean Edited July 4, 2016 by rodheadlee 1
Popular Post smac97 Posted July 4, 2016 Popular Post Posted July 4, 2016 (edited) 18 hours ago, Five Solas said: Between this and what Bernard Gui mentioned about Tacoma area ward consolidations, I'm now realizing my mistake. I had *assumed* LDS ward closures/consolidations were a phenomena within the Seattle city boundaries and that LDS folks were merely moving into the adjacent suburbs. That isn't true. I was wrong. This is a Puget Sound regional story, not a Seattle story. LDS are leaving (or just maybe just quitting) across a much larger geographic area in the Pacific Northwest. Also, I must fess up--I previously understated the impact on the North Seattle Stake. I have since learned the Seattle University First ward dissolved in 2012. There are now only two wards remaining in the LDS Institute across the street from UW on 15th Ave NE, not three as I stated previously. That's 50% of YSA gone in a little over a decade, not 25%. Talk about not reaching/retaining Millennials! This is quite stunning. The Church is, I think, working hard to retain Millennials. It must engage in such efforts while maintaining its mandate, and that mandate can be a challenge given today's sociopolitical climate. Quote Please pardon my errors & let my thread continue. To recap the explanations for the LDS retreat thus far-- 1) Cities are increasingly hostile to families/family-centric institutions (favored by smac97, others). Explanation flies in face of increasing number of families/children living in Seattle, but nevertheless keeps getting repeated on the thread by some LDS folks who really seem to like it, for whatever reason. Again, do you have any evidence that increasing numbers of "families/children living in Seattle" are representative of a larger demographic trend? Frankly, I'm just not seeing it. Pretty much everything I've read on the issue indicates that families are emptying out of The City in favor of The 'Burbs (your mileage in Seattle may vary). There are all sorts of reasons for this, I think. School choice is a biggie. Having a backyard and other types of "elbow room" in which a child or children can be raised is, in most instances, going to make The 'Burbs more attractive than The City. We're not speaking of this issue "for whatever {unknown} reason." There are articles all over the place about it. We are working with the data, that's all. Quote 2) Ideology (favored by Bernard Gui, rodheadlee, others). This merits further exploration. Can LDS really not bear to live in the vicinity of those with "uber-progressive" views? Seattle is good for families, but not "conservative families"? Aren't we all Americans? (Okay, a few of you reading this may not be.) What's really going on here? Might I suggest a somewhat broader perspective here. "Tolerance" is, or rather should be, a two-way street, particularly on difficult social topics about which reasonable minds can disagree (immigration policy, same-sex marriage, transgender bathrooms, political affiliation, abortion, racial harmony, etc.). The screams of hatred and intolerance are not coming from socially conservative/religious families. Those screams are being directed against socially conservative/religious families. We are being harangued as bigots, racists, sexists, homophobes, etc. We are being accused of some incredibly offensive things. And for many (most?) of us, these are false accusations intended not to describe, but to punish and silence. And these accusations are coming from some portions of "those with 'uber-progressive' views." "What's really going on here" is that socially conservative people often do not feel welcome in The City. "Live and let live," "Aren't we all Americans," "Diversity is great" and all the other catch phrases are not spoken in good faith, because the single most important type of diversity - diversity of opinion and thought - is not welcome or tolerated by many of "those with 'uber-progressive' views." So socially conservative people, when faced with such animus (and considering the various disadvantages of The City and the allurements of The 'Burbs), often vote with their feet. And in that vote they take their children with them. And since socially conservative/religious people tend to have more children than the "'uber-progressive' views" crowd (one of the principal sacred cows of which is . . . abortion, which is one of many factors that substantially reduce the fecundity of such folks), it's not really surprising to read observations coming in from all over the U.S. (as well as the rest of the world) about families with children ditching The City for The 'Burbs. Quote 3) Economy (I won't attribute this to a single poster, but you can figure it out if you read previous posts closely). This one requires some sensitivity, because I wouldn't suggest there's something inherent about LDS that prevents them from competing for housing in Seattle (and surrounding areas). No need for sensitivity here, I think. It's simply a matter of choices and priorities. Latter-day Saints have more children than the national average. That's a choice. Having more children operates to limit the housing choices of LDS families because A) they need/want more square footage and amenities than, say, a childless couple, B) such square footage and amenities come at a substantially increased cost in The City (as compared to The 'Burbs), and C) individuals and couples with comparable education and income but with fewer or no children will axiomatically have more disposable income than the LDS families described above, and hence will be able to outbid LDS families for In-The-City digs. I could choose to live in Salt Lake City. But I don't want to. The housing is significantly more expensive. The per-square-foot cost is comparatively prohibitive. There are virtually no opportunities for me to replicate my current lifestyle in The 'Burbs (Provo) in The City. And I really, really like my lifestyle. So I choose to live in The 'Burbs. I do not look down on folks who choose to live in The City. They simply have different priorities and preferences than mine, and I am fine with that. Quote Plenty of other groups can muster the means to live here, including, as Downtown Cornerstone Church (and many others) demonstrate, Evangelical Christians. IMO, LDS can too--if they want to. Nonetheless, the economics of city living vis-a-vis LDS should be explored further, since it's been brought up. Perhaps. But I'm not sure we'll see a significant shift in these demographic trends. The 'Burbs first arose largely due to people wanting more lucrative jobs in The City, while preferring to live outside The City. Advances in technology are weakening this phenomenon. Many jobs no longer require a person to commute to and work in The City. Proximity to The City is therefore no longer an imperative for many types of jobs. Thanks, -Smac Edited July 4, 2016 by smac97 6
Five Solas Posted July 7, 2016 Author Posted July 7, 2016 On 7/3/2016 at 5:43 PM, 3DOP said: Erik, What I would share is only anecdotal, but I think it illustrates that the phenomenon you raise isn't just an LDS problem. I suspect it is the same for any religious institution that adheres to traditional moral values and especially if they teach that it is a blessing to have more than one or two children. I go to Mass at a chapel in Portland, OR just down the road from you. We have been trying to find another location because our current property isn't big enough anymore. It is a nice problem to have and I am not complaining. I don't have the stats but it seems like we must have six infant baptisms to every funeral. There are so many babies. Three of my own grandchildren are under four years old. We still have some older singles who live in Portland city limits and some have been with us a long time and we know it will be painful for them if we need to move. However, there are many young people of marrying age who will only add to this trend of baptisms over funerals. None of these would seem to be inclined towards living in the city and we have got to make a decision some time in the next few years about how to proceed. An anlaysis of the parish demographics shows that there is not one school age child left in our parish who lives in the city of Portland where their family brings them to Mass! Not one. My conclusion is that nude bike rides and "keeping Portland weird" makes parents with large families uncomfortable. Why would they want to spend the extra money to live in a city that seems disdainful of Christian morality in general and hostile to having many children in particular? It has made the leadership of the parish consider moving the chapel to the suburbs at some point. There are aspects of city life that are very appealing to me too. I don't like the idea of religious people fleeing the cities. But sometimes I get tired of the billboards and bumper stickers that are constant reminders of how out of step I am with the city. I can't blame the young husbands and wives for starting out where it is much less expensive and where it seems more welcoming. Appreciate you sharing, 3DOP. It would be interesting to do a comparison between Seattle and Portland. Despite proximity, they are quite different cities (my firm has an office down there). A previous poster mentioned the LDS Church is doing well in Portland--unlike what's happening in Seattle, especially at the "young single adult" level where two wards,University First and University Fourth have closed down in the past decade. By contrast, the Catholic Church seems to be holding its own in Seattle, a new church "Christ Our Hope" opened right in the heart of our downtown a couple years back and appears to be going strong. You may know more about it than I, of course. --Erik
Okrahomer Posted April 16, 2017 Posted April 16, 2017 Thread necromancy alert! And for what it's worth: I came across an interesting online tool recently which reminded me of this thread. The website is managed by the Public Religion Research Institute or PRRI for short. PRRI describes itself as a “…a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to conducting independent research at the intersection of religion, culture, and public policy.” Some of PRRI’s research partners include The Brookings Institution, The American Academy of Religion, and Religion News Service. Those of you who take an interest in demographic research and the like may enjoy “playing” with PRRI’s interactive atlas. Data available without subscription include Religious Affiliation, Demographics, Politics, Immigration, LGBT, and Discrimination. One can select data for the entire country, for individual US states, US Regions, and for 30 US metro areas. For instance, PRRI data indicate that the percentage of the US population that self-identified as “Mormon” in 2013 (1.9%) remained unchanged in 2016 (1.9%); while those who do not identify with any religion rose from 21.1% to 23.6%. While I was exploring this interactive map, it occurred to me that one might use it to test some of the assertions we have read here. The results were interesting: In the Seattle area for example, the percentage of self-identified Mormons actually INCREASED between 2013 and 2016 from 2% to 3%. Meanwhile, the percentage of self-identified Evangelical Christians DECLINED from 14% to 11%. At least in Seattle then, these particular data do not support the assertions. On the other hand, I had claimed that the LDS Church was “doing quite well in Portland.” But I see now that this was probably not correct, since the percentage of self-identified Mormons in Portland DECLINED between 2013 and 2016 (from 5% to 3%). At the same time, however, it should be pointed out that the news for Evangelicals was also not positive in Portland where their percentage declined even more--from 19% to 16%. But since Erik's questions were really about the decline of the LDS Church in urban areas in general, it is perhaps more useful to look at the data for all 30 metro areas: For all 30 US metro areas, the percentage of self-identified Mormons increased in 6 of them, declined in 9, and remained the same in 15 (i.e., exactly half.) So it seems the LDS Church is just holding its own in US urban areas right now. But the situation for urban evangelicalism is clearly worse. Of the 30 US metro areas for which data is available, the percentage of self-identified Evangelicals increased in just 5 of them; while it actually declined in more than half (i.e., 18), and remained the same in only 7. By the way, the clear "winner" with respect to the self-identification data are the "Unaffiliated"--i.e., those who claim no religion. 4
Meadowchik Posted April 16, 2017 Posted April 16, 2017 On Monday, June 27, 2016 at 4:17 AM, smac97 said: Most large urban centers do not particularly cater to families. The problem lies not with Mormons per se, but with children (that is to say, families) and other factors which, cumulatively, are generally inimical to the raising of children in large cities. This article, which was published in USA Today a few days ago, touches on this issue (emphasis added): This is, apparently, a world-wide phenomenon: The article goes on to explain the political aspects of how and why large urban centers have become less family-friendly (to sum up: big cities = big opportunities for "snobbery, graft and politics"). There are many articles about this phenomenon. Here are a few: City Kids: Why Parents Pick City Living Over the Suburbs (this one describes people who have bucked the trend and are raising their children in big cities) The Decline of the Family-Friendly City Southern California Becoming Less Family-Friendly I think we should expect that, as big cities become less "family-friendly," we will see a lessened presence of family-centric institutions like the LDS Church. Thanks, -Smac On urban areas catering to families: Our family chose a village with population 550, roughly a thirty minute drive from the wardhouse in the nearest major city, but the majority of active ward members live within half that distance from the wardhouse. Fortunately, the chapel is near a tram stop, and there are many ward members who attend without a car. There are, however, some disabled members who can only make it to church with the assistance of some very kind ward members. Anyway, I can say that, in our experience, our family experiences an unexpected fundamental deficit by not living in the city. We have children eith special educational needs that the state is ill-equipped to address in our more rural area, despite their legal obligation to do so. When we tried to enroll them in school four years ago, the principal actually advised us against it. Cities are resource centers in almost every respect: material, social, cultural. If you need something apart from actual open spaces and uncultivated landscapes, youre more likely to find it nearer a city. Families are like other people, they need things and institutions, and they are more likely to find these nearer cities. If a family is in need of everyday access to city ameneties, they will more likely gravitate to cities: good schools, childcare, more job opportunities, more benefits like doctors, music and sports societies and clubs, products tailored to people with special needs. And that is why cities generally are more expensive. People want to live there, including families. 1
thesometimesaint Posted April 16, 2017 Posted April 16, 2017 I get the best of both worlds in the suburbs. A patch of land and a city close enough for everything else. 2
carbon dioxide Posted April 17, 2017 Posted April 17, 2017 I am sure living in downtown Seattle have many benefits for young people who do not have many kids. When people get older, their priorities change and they want more space not only for their kids but also for their own sanity. In regards to Seattle, living in the city may not be the best place to live once that big 9.0 earthquake hits. Being further inland and away from the fault line may be good advice.
carbon dioxide Posted April 17, 2017 Posted April 17, 2017 On 6/26/2016 at 7:09 PM, Five Solas said: Do you think there’s anything inherent in the LDS culture/religion that favors suburban lifestyles with its automobile dependency, relative conservatism, and other aspects of life associated with suburbs? The national trend is that liberals live in cities and conservatives live i more rural areas. Perhaps some of that has to do that conservatives want less dependency on government. For example you suggest that suburban life is dependent on the car. This may be true but for someone like me, I would rather be dependent on a car than dependent on public transportation. I love cars. I like being in my own place traveling with the music loud and not being annoyed by people around me that I do not know. Plus if I go shopping, I can buy as much stuff as a need and transport it back to my house without too much trouble. The idea of buying a 100 bucks in groceries and transporting them back on a public bus is not my idea of a good time. 2
sunstoned Posted April 17, 2017 Posted April 17, 2017 19 hours ago, Okrahomer said: Thread necromancy alert! And for what it's worth: self-identification data are the "Unaffiliated"--i.e., those who claim no religion. Things do appear to be slowing a bit for those who subscribe to Daniel's rolling stone prophecy. IMHO, many today are satisfied to live their lives doing no harm and living and let live. I don't think there is anything wrong with this.
RevTestament Posted April 17, 2017 Posted April 17, 2017 On 7/4/2016 at 5:34 AM, Kenngo1969 said: The same thing happened in the same area in the early 2000s when I was a member of a ward in the area. Houses formerly occupied by families had been taken over by singles and young childless marrieds, so several wards were consolidated and/or had their boundaries realigned. Conversely, the opposite is happening where I'm living now in Northern Utah County: boundaries were realigned and, where I used to live in one ward, now a new ward has been created. While my work schedule mandates that I attend a different ward that skews older and has far fewer younger, child-rearing couples, my own ward largely is populated by young couples who have (or who are expecting, or who are planning to have) young children. The primary organization is, in Donald Trump's word, "yuge." My first ward in Utah was in an older neighborhood, but it had a new starter-home subdivision next to it which was part of the ward. My ward had two primaries, and actually at the time I had children in them, But I was a little older than most of the couples in the subdivision, while substantially younger than most of the people in the older neighborhood. It was interesting. 1
Five Solas Posted April 18, 2017 Author Posted April 18, 2017 On 4/16/2017 at 0:11 AM, Okrahomer said: Thread necromancy alert! And for what it's worth: I came across an interesting online tool recently which reminded me of this thread. The website is managed by the Public Religion Research Institute or PRRI for short. PRRI describes itself as a “…a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to conducting independent research at the intersection of religion, culture, and public policy.” Some of PRRI’s research partners include The Brookings Institution, The American Academy of Religion, and Religion News Service. Those of you who take an interest in demographic research and the like may enjoy “playing” with PRRI’s interactive atlas. Data available without subscription include Religious Affiliation, Demographics, Politics, Immigration, LGBT, and Discrimination. One can select data for the entire country, for individual US states, US Regions, and for 30 US metro areas. For instance, PRRI data indicate that the percentage of the US population that self-identified as “Mormon” in 2013 (1.9%) remained unchanged in 2016 (1.9%); while those who do not identify with any religion rose from 21.1% to 23.6%. While I was exploring this interactive map, it occurred to me that one might use it to test some of the assertions we have read here. The results were interesting: In the Seattle area for example, the percentage of self-identified Mormons actually INCREASED between 2013 and 2016 from 2% to 3%. Meanwhile, the percentage of self-identified Evangelical Christians DECLINED from 14% to 11%. At least in Seattle then, these particular data do not support the assertions. On the other hand, I had claimed that the LDS Church was “doing quite well in Portland.” But I see now that this was probably not correct, since the percentage of self-identified Mormons in Portland DECLINED between 2013 and 2016 (from 5% to 3%). At the same time, however, it should be pointed out that the news for Evangelicals was also not positive in Portland where their percentage declined even more--from 19% to 16%. But since Erik's questions were really about the decline of the LDS Church in urban areas in general, it is perhaps more useful to look at the data for all 30 metro areas: For all 30 US metro areas, the percentage of self-identified Mormons increased in 6 of them, declined in 9, and remained the same in 15 (i.e., exactly half.) So it seems the LDS Church is just holding its own in US urban areas right now. But the situation for urban evangelicalism is clearly worse. Of the 30 US metro areas for which data is available, the percentage of self-identified Evangelicals increased in just 5 of them; while it actually declined in more than half (i.e., 18), and remained the same in only 7. By the way, the clear "winner" with respect to the self-identification data are the "Unaffiliated"--i.e., those who claim no religion. To celebrate Easter Sunday, Okrahomer resurrected a thread! I'm going to guess the LDS "growth" from 2% to 3% of self-identified LDS in Seattle and the "decline" in Portland from 5% to 3% are both well within the PRRI poll's margin of error. Meaning you're basing conclusions on statistical noise. If the LDS Church really had picked up an additional 1% of Seattle's population (~700K residents in the city limits), that would be an extra 7,000 people--meaning we'd be seeing a whole lot of new wards and stakes. Yeah, that ain't happening. Likewise, if the Evangelical Christian population were in a free-fall, networks like Acts 29 would be closing churches in Seattle. And that ain't happening either. But I do have to wonder how many non-denominational Protestant Christians actually choose to self-identify as "Evangelical" these days. That label may have lost some luster. Now it just means an angry white person who voted for President Trump, right? ;0) --Erik ______________________________________________ Down where your paint is cracking Look down your backstair, buddy Somebody's living there and He don't really feel the weather And he don't share your pleasures No, he don't share your pleasures --Iggy Pop, 1977
Okrahomer Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 3 hours ago, Five Solas said: I'm going to guess the LDS "growth" from 2% to 3% of self-identified LDS in Seattle and the "decline" in Portland from 5% to 3% are both well within the PRRI poll's margin of error. Meaning you're basing conclusions on statistical noise. But I do have to wonder how many non-denominational Protestant Christians actually choose to self-identify as "Evangelical" these days. That label may have lost some luster. PRRI claims the margin of error for their data is "+/- 0.4 percentage points at the 95% level of confidence." I agree that "statistical noise" is probably a factor here; nevertheless, I think PRRI has provided an interesting tool, and I appreciate how they've made it available to anyone. I think it adds a useful data point to discussions such as this. I wasn't sure how you would "self-identify." I think I've seen you defend "Evangelical" positions on this board from time-to-time, so that's the one I looked at; however, "non-denominational" is also included in the PRRI survey. Unfortunately, the results don't look any better in Seattle and Portland for this group either--particularly in Seattle. Perhaps it's just more "noise." 3
Five Solas Posted April 18, 2017 Author Posted April 18, 2017 8 hours ago, Okrahomer said: PRRI claims the margin of error for their data is "+/- 0.4 percentage points at the 95% level of confidence." I agree that "statistical noise" is probably a factor here; nevertheless, I think PRRI has provided an interesting tool, and I appreciate how they've made it available to anyone. I think it adds a useful data point to discussions such as this. I wasn't sure how you would "self-identify." I think I've seen you defend "Evangelical" positions on this board from time-to-time, so that's the one I looked at; however, "non-denominational" is also included in the PRRI survey. Unfortunately, the results don't look any better in Seattle and Portland for this group either--particularly in Seattle. Perhaps it's just more "noise." 4 tenths of 1%--that would be an extraordinarily precise (and expensive!) poll. Afraid someone misplaced the decimal. Plus/minus 4 points is typical. There's actually a thread open at the moment on the results of a Gallup survey, and it's exactly that. I would identify as Christian, Protestant, non-denominational. And yes, I incline towards Reformed theology. :0) --Erik
Okrahomer Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 (edited) 11 hours ago, Five Solas said: 4 tenths of 1%--that would be an extraordinarily precise (and expensive!) poll. Afraid someone misplaced the decimal. Plus/minus 4 points is typical. There's actually a thread open at the moment on the results of a Gallup survey, and it's exactly that. I would identify as Christian, Protestant, non-denominational. And yes, I incline towards Reformed theology. :0) --Erik The Gallup poll you're referring to is based on a sample size of just 1,526 adults; while the PRRI data is derived from a sample size of 101,438. If this is just a typo, then it's also odd that the misplaced decimal point is perpetuated every year--in all 4 years of published PRRI data--even when the percentage itself has changed. In 2013 for example, their methodology section indicates this: "The margin of error for total sample is +/- 0.5 percentage points at the 95% level of confidence." A quick look at PEW for comparative purposes reveals that the margin of error for their "national" estimates is +/- 0.6 percent--very similar to PRRI. PEW also indicates that the margin increases for "sub-group estimates." (PEW's margin is 4.9% for "Mormons", for example.) My understanding is that the larger margin of error is the result of opinion-seeking within a specific sub-group itself. I don't see anything similar in PRRI's methodology, but I've sent them an e-mail asking for clarification. If they actually respond, I'll let you know. I appreciate understanding your beliefs a bit better. I would have thought you to be much more robustly Reformed (consistently Calvinist) in your theology than merely "inclined" towards it. Sometimes, I am not that good at reading between the lines; and this is probably a good example of that. I apologize for any faulty assumptions I've made about your beliefs. Edited April 19, 2017 by Okrahomer 1
Okrahomer Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 Here you go, Erik: a handy online calculator to help you determine the appropriate sample size as a function of the desired "Confidence Interval"--i.e., Margin of error. If you plug US population in there along with 0.5 as your desired Confidence Interval, you'll get something like 38,000--which is about PEW's sample size for their Religious Landscape" survey. 1
Daniel2 Posted April 19, 2017 Posted April 19, 2017 On 6/26/2016 at 7:09 PM, Five Solas said: A large rainbow flag flies from the Space Needle today. We passed it on our way to church this morning and my 7 year-old asked about it. She’s already aware from school that a child can sometimes have two mommies or two daddies. And (with help from my wife) I explained that the flag represents gays or homosexuals and we should treat people the way we would want to be treated. Pride parades take place in major cities across the United States (and elsewhere) this time of year. And it got me thinking—many if not most LDS eschew urban living, preferring sub-urban lifestyles (where the sight of a rainbow flag is a good deal rarer). The LDS community within the Seattle city limits has been in gradual decline over the past couple decades, consolidating/closing wards (e.g., University 4th, the International Ward) while the city’s population has grown rapidly during this same period (meaning LDS per-capita in Seattle has been in a fairly steep decline). Interestingly, the North Seattle Stake has done away with the old ward numbering scheme and given their remaining wards neighborhood names approximate to their boundaries—and that illustrates a problem. With the exception of Magnolia (where a dedicated building has long supported a single neighborhood ward) and the three remaining "young single adult" wards that meet in the University of Washington LDS Institute building—everyone else from downtown to Northgate, Ballard to Sand Point is expected to pile into their cars and make the trip to the stake center each Sunday. The key word right there is “cars”—an essential & expected tool in suburbia, but people in the city increasingly don’t have them (parking alone can cost up to $300/month). And suffice it to say, mass transit accessibility wasn’t a primary concern for the location of the stake center. Pride parades may be the proverbial red herring. And Seattle may be a special case with zero application for the broader LDS religious community (some of you may hope so). But my question is this: Do you think there’s anything inherent in the LDS culture/religion that favors suburban lifestyles with its automobile dependency, relative conservatism, and other aspects of life associated with suburbs? --Erik PS. I love the city! Kudos to your explanation to your kids of what the Rainbow Flag symbolizes--I fully agree that that's ultimately the goal of what the rainbow truly means to the gay community... I think many people may not give much thought as to why the LGBT community so identifies with the rainbow (phrases like "The Gays co-opted the rainbow from God" seem to me to indicate that there really isn't much understanding between the two groups, and especially demonstrate a lack of understanding as to why the LGBT community celebrates the rainbow as a symbol of a 'live and let live' approach to diversity, as well as learning to value others' differences). By the way, my favorite cinematic representation of this concept can be found here: As for whether or not there's "anything inherent in the LDS culture/religion that favors suburban lifestyles with its automobile dependency, relative conservatism, and other aspects of life associated with suburbs?"... When I was a kid, I grew up overseas across northern Europe, where our congregations almost always consisted of branches, instead of wards. Our church buildings ranged from rented halls above antique stores to schools on US military bases to the occasional tiny chapel built in pockets of growing church activity. In my experience, our fellow church members who comprised those branches, though small in numbers and spread across vast distances, often took their commitment to the gospel, attending church despite having to take public transportation or even long walks; to home and visiting teaching; to standing as witnesses of love, compassion, charity, hope, and happiness at all times; to spreading the joy of the gospel... all rivaled many of the large, highly-populated, UT/CA/AZ-based, centrally-located wards that I would attend when my family visited our relatives in the states during the summer. I remember being absolutely shocked when, as a 12-year-old kid on a visit to a local Utah ward, the Deacon's Quorum Advisor took the whole Quorum to 7-11 during class (on a Sunday!) to get them Big Gulps... when I expressed surprise, the Advisor told me that if he didn't incorporate such trips in his class, the deacons would skip out on class and go down there anyway. I recall how less-than-wealthy members of our European/Military wards would sacrifice a great deal to ensure their Priesthood-bearing sons had sport coats/suits, ties, and Sunday shoes in which to bless the sacrament, befitting of their holy calling in administering the body and blood of Christ, and was surprised to see US-based wards were happy if their sons just wore a white shirt, no matter how wrinkled they may be, and at least had tennis shoes. I recall being surprised at how laid back the Scouting programs were in the US, where dads often just 'passed off' their sons with minimal (if any) effort on their son's part; as contrasted with the great effort that kids overseas were taught in doing the work themselves.... As I read through this, I suppose I sound like a judgmental jerk, and maybe even a tad Pharisaical... but that wasn't my intent. It just seemed that where the church was small and required effort, it was appreciated more and taken... a bit more seriously, I guess...? Where the church was mainstream and easy, it seemed like it was taken for granted. That is was just something to go along with... and in many cases, even rebel against (whereas the church, in the mission field, was something that set us apart and made us strive to be more than the minimal effort... I guess that's what Brigham Young meant when he said, “The worst fear I have about this people is that they will get rich in this country, forget God and His people, wax fat, and kick themselves out of the Church and go to hell. This people will stand mobbing, robbing, poverty, and all manner of persecution and be true. But my greatest fear is that they cannot stand wealth."
Kenngo1969 Posted June 25, 2017 Posted June 25, 2017 Thought this was interesting, and perhaps apropos of this discussion: http://www.sltrib.com/home/5403049-155/salt-lake-county-is-becoming-less
Scott Lloyd Posted June 25, 2017 Posted June 25, 2017 On 4/16/2017 at 8:17 PM, sunstoned said: Things do appear to be slowing a bit for those who subscribe to Daniel's rolling stone prophecy. IMHO, many today are satisfied to live their lives doing no harm and living and let live. I don't think there is anything wrong with this. Like many people, you seem to harbor a misconception of when and how Daniel's prophecy is to be fulfilled. Its scope and timeline extend way past the beginning of Christ's millennial reign. Meanwhile, Nephi's prophetic vision is right on course. The church of the Lamb of God is few in numbers, just as Nephe beheld, but its reach is global, just as Nephi beheld. 2
USU78 Posted June 25, 2017 Posted June 25, 2017 1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said: Thought this was interesting, and perhaps apropos of this discussion: http://www.sltrib.com/home/5403049-155/salt-lake-county-is-becoming-less Urban flight or blight fright?
Five Solas Posted June 25, 2017 Author Posted June 25, 2017 And wouldn't you know, the rainbow flag is atop the Space Needle again today. Apropos indeed that Kenngo1969 would bring back this thread on today of all days. :0) And I agree the SL Tribune link was interesting. That the ratio of LDS to non is increasing in Utah County while decreasing in the more urban Salt Lake County is certainly on point. And it's no less interesting that the LDS Church is increasingly secretive about its membership statistics--to the point of requiring the University of Utah to enter into a legally binding non-disclosure agreement. But no doubt it's the critics' fault for making the LDS leadership all paranoid like that... ;0) --Erik __________________________ Blame it on your karmic curse Oh shame upon the universe It knows its lines It's well rehearsed --Depeche Mode "Dream On"
ksfisher Posted June 26, 2017 Posted June 26, 2017 2 hours ago, USU78 said: Urban flight or blight fright? Housing prices have a lot to do with it. It's getting more difficult for families with children to find affordable housing in Salt Lake County. 1
Recommended Posts