Non-Religious Population, Will it Increase or Decrease in the Future?

[Ahab]

2 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Well the crux is that I forced myself to consider the fruits of loving gay relationships. Whatever God's ultimate plan, those fruits result precisely the way love itself is described in scripture. So, I can only conclude that divine good results from divine love. 

True love involves doing all you can to give all the joy possible to the person you love, and someone who gets into a sexual relationship with someone else of the same sex is not only getting that person into serious sexual sin but also limiting the joy that person can receive.  The sexual relationship will end at the death of either one of them, if not sooner, and it takes both a man and a woman to have all the joy possible from any sexual relationship.  

People of the same sex do not always agree with that, of course.   They sometimes think can be happier with each other of the same sex than with anyone of the opposite sex, but that is not really the case, and sooner or later they will discover that whatever level of happiness they have together, if they do share in any true happiness together, will come to an end when either one of them dies.

[Meadowchik]

10 minutes ago, Ahab said:

True love involves doing all you can to give all the joy possible to the person you love, and someone who gets into a sexual relationship with someone else of the same sex is not only getting that person into serious sexual sin but also limiting the joy that person can receive.  The sexual relationship will end at the death of either one of them, if not sooner, and it takes both a man and a woman to have all the joy possible from any sexual relationship.  

People of the same sex do not always agree with that, of course.   They sometimes think can be happier with each other of the same sex than with anyone of the opposite sex, but that is not really the case, and sooner or later they will discover that whatever level of happiness they have together, if they do share in any true happiness together, will come to an end when either one of them dies.

I don't think so. Speaking from my perspective from when I still believed in the Restoration, twenty years ago I searched and searched for doctrinal answers regarding my best friend's dead brother. I concluded that God was much more merciful than her brother's "enemies" like you would say. And years later, I came to similar conclusions about homosexual love. It's certainly not another's place to evaluate a gay person's journey. You really cannot know what you're claiming. But you're willing to bet on it and let the chips fall, and with it the suffering now. I'm willing to hope for the power of actual love, not just legalisms.

Edited December 3, 2019 by Meadowchik

[Ahab]

1 minute ago, Meadowchik said:

I don't think so. Speaking from my perspective from when I still believed in the Restoration, twenty years ago I searched and searched for doctrinal answers regarding my best friend's dead brother. I concluded that God was much more merciful than her brother's "enemies" like you would say. And years later, I came to similar conclusions about homosexual love. It's certainly not another's place to evaluate a gay person's journey. You really cannot know what you're claiming. But you're willing to bet on it and let the chips fall, and with it the suffering now. I'm willing to hope for the power of actual love, not just legalisms.

I told you what actual love prompts someone to do.  They seek the welfare of the person they love, not their own welfare.  2 people of the same sex may not believe it is a sin or against the law of God to have sexual relations together, and they may believe that their sexual relationship will continue in heaven as it now is on this planet, but sooner or later they will find out that is not going to happen and that they chose to limit how much joy they could have had in their lives.  Divine love does not reward sin or allow something to continue that should not have started in the first place. It is not good for 2 people of the same sex to have sexual relations together, even if they get some pleasure from it.  It isn't good in itself and it doesn't lead to anything good.  It is like choosing to go down a dead end road instead of a road that would have taken them to ultimate destination possible for any person of any sex.

You will likely not believe what I am saying but if you go down that road then you will eventually find out for yourself.  God doesn't "punish" people who do that.  It just isn't good and it doesn't lead to anything good, even if the people who choose it like it and want it to go on forever.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, Ahab said:

I think you're either being funny or by "religious people" you're referring to the religious people like us who are sealed together as husband and wife by the power of the priesthood of God.  Only "we" will be the ones who reproduce when this world comes to an end.

I am speaking seriously about birth rates among religious people, as opposed to irreligious people.  Observant Mormons, Jews, Muslims, and Evangelicals just have a higher birthrate (a replacement birthrate), which is not true of secularists.  This means that, demographically, the irreligious people simply die out.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, Thinking said:

Really? Zero?

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/gods-little-rabbits-religious-people-out-reproduce-secular-ones-by-a-landslide/ .

[LoudmouthMormon]

Stargazer, I know many folks have been aware of the demographic trends you describe for some time now.  And no, I don't think "fearmongering" is an appropriate description of your post.  More like just pointing out some pretty hefty demographic trends, and some rational impacts should those trends continue.   

I also don't think it's fearmongering to point out that current scientific understanding of stellar lifespans indicate that our sun will eventually expand into a red giant and render our earth sterile of all life as we currently know it.  Now, if I were to, oh, say, spin those facts into a melodramatic attempt to push some sort of radical environmental agenda that, if enacted, would have seriously negative impacts on national and global economies, that would be fear mongering.

 

Edited December 3, 2019 by LoudmouthMormon

[Ahab]

5 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I am speaking seriously about birth rates among religious people, as opposed to irreligious people.  Observant Mormons, Jews, Muslims, and Evangelicals just have a higher birthrate (a replacement birthrate), which is not true of secularists.  This means that, demographically, the irreligious people simply die out.

IF that is really true, which I doubt, and I somehow find out it is true, I will be utterly flabbergasted.  Maybe we're not in agreement about what we mean by "irreligious people"???  

I've known people who don't affiliate with any Church or religious group who have had children, and whose children have had children.  Are you suggesting that at some point their family line would either stop having children or join some religious group?  How long do they have before going extinct?  And how would anybody find out about this?  In some cases I can see it is true but I can't see how anyone could reasonably make a general  blanket statement like that.

It's been a while since I have been utterly flabbergasted but I think I am ready for it if it should ever happen again.  

[Stargazer]

48 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Secularisation may also provide a safe haven for Muslims--just like for Christians--to take leave of their religious traditions. People gravitate to perceived safety. 

There's many other variables though. Pandemics, for example, are inevitable. Pollution and resource scarcity can create more intense changes.

Yep, those can happen, too.  I am acquainted with a few Muslims here in the UK, and some are quite secularized, and others are still TBM.  

According to prophecy, the end times are going to be full of pandemics and other upheavals.  

[CA Steve]

21 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I am speaking seriously about birth rates among religious people, as opposed to irreligious people.  Observant Mormons, Jews, Muslims, and Evangelicals just have a higher birthrate (a replacement birthrate), which is not true of secularists.  This means that, demographically, the irreligious people simply die out.

I think I see a flaw in this reasoning Robert. While the birth rates may be higher among religious people, what prevents  the offspring of religious people from becoming  secularist?

[Stargazer]

24 minutes ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Stargazer, I know many folks have been aware of the demographic trends you describe for some time now.  And no, I don't think "fearmongering" is an appropriate description of your post.  More like just pointing out some pretty hefty demographic trends, and some rational impacts should those trends continue.   

I also don't think it's fearmongering to point out that current scientific understanding of stellar lifespans indicate that our sun will eventually expand into a red giant and render our earth sterile of all life as we currently know it.  Now, if I were to, oh, say, spin those facts into a melodramatic attempt to push some sort of radical environmental agenda that, if enacted, would have seriously negative impacts on national and global economies, that would be fear mongering.

 

Fearmonger!!!

Can I interest you in a multi-level marketing plan that will make you rich and by the way help you migrate to Mars in order to avoid this terrible tragedy?  We call it the Ares Plan!  And Elon Musk is totally on board with it.

LOL.

[Stargazer]

18 minutes ago, Ahab said:

IF that is really true, which I doubt, and I somehow find out it is true, I will be utterly flabbergasted.  Maybe we're not in agreement about what we mean by "irreligious people"???  

I've known people who don't affiliate with any Church or religious group who have had children, and whose children have had children.  Are you suggesting that at some point their family line would either stop having children or join some religious group?  How long do they have before going extinct?  And how would anybody find out about this?  In some cases I can see it is true but I can't see how anyone could reasonably make a general  blanket statement like that.

It's been a while since I have been utterly flabbergasted but I think I am ready for it if it should ever happen again.  

The reason why I posited that Islam would become dominant in Europe is because of the cultural strength of being at least outwardly observant Muslim.  How many people in Egypt, for example, just don't bother to answer the call to prayer -- and openly eat in daylight during Ramadan?  And who raise pigs for food, and so on?  They might be unbelievers, but there is a strong impetus towards at least appearing to be a believer.  And as Islam becomes more prevalent in Europe, it will become harder to be a backslider.  I know a few backsliders, and they have no fear of being called out because they live apart from the Muslim community. The ones that live in it, however, they find it harder.

[Robert F. Smith]

8 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

I think I see a flaw in this reasoning Robert. While the birth rates may be higher among religious people, what prevents  the offspring of religious people from becoming  secularist?

There is no flaw.  The birthrate among secular peoples is not only low, it is not even at replacement level.  The children of religious people can certainly choose to become secularist, but that simply means that such children will likely not reproduce.  The religious community, therefore, continues to reproduce itself, while the secularist community comes to a dead end -- literally.

[Robert F. Smith]

25 minutes ago, Ahab said:

IF that is really true, which I doubt, and I somehow find out it is true, I will be utterly flabbergasted.  Maybe we're not in agreement about what we mean by "irreligious people"???  

I've known people who don't affiliate with any Church or religious group who have had children, and whose children have had children.  Are you suggesting that at some point their family line would either stop having children or join some religious group?  How long do they have before going extinct?  And how would anybody find out about this?  In some cases I can see it is true but I can't see how anyone could reasonably make a general  blanket statement like that.

It's been a while since I have been utterly flabbergasted but I think I am ready for it if it should ever happen again.  

The handwriting has been on the wall now for a long time.  There is nothing new in these demographic facts, and anecdotal observations are irrelevant.  

Here is an article in Scientific American: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/gods-little-rabbits-religious-people-out-reproduce-secular-ones-by-a-landslide/ .

Here are figures from Pew Research Center:  https://www.pewresearch.org/topics/birth-rate-and-fertility/project/religion/ .

[Ahab]

4 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

The reason why I posited that Islam would become dominant in Europe is because of the cultural strength of being at least outwardly observant Muslim.  How many people in Egypt, for example, just don't bother to answer the call to prayer -- and openly eat in daylight during Ramadan?  And who raise pigs for food, and so on?  They might be unbelievers, but there is a strong impetus towards at least appearing to be a believer.  And as Islam becomes more prevalent in Europe, it will become harder to be a backslider.  I know a few backsliders, and they have no fear of being called out because they live apart from the Muslim community. The ones that live in it, however, they find it harder.

You seem to imagine people as somehow very prone to peer pressure.  As if grown adults actually care what other people think about their beliefs or lack of beliefs.  Enough for those adults to put on a show for others to try to trick them or make them believe they believe what those other people believe.  I won't ask if you are serious about and instead just say that in my experience people are not that concerned with what other people believe or with what other people believe about their beliefs.  It's not like we're still in high school and trying to fit in with the cool crowd.  "What other people think is their problem if they don't agree with what I think" is the general attitude I've noticed from most of the people I have met since I left high school, and some people in high school weren't all that impressed by peer pressure either.

[CA Steve]

7 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

There is no flaw.  The birthrate among secular peoples is not only low, it is not even at replacement level.  The children of religious people can certainly choose to become secularist, but that simply means that such children will likely not reproduce.  The religious community, therefore, continues to reproduce itself, while the secularist community comes to a dead end -- literally.

Not sure why this is even in dispute. As long as religious people can produce secular offspring, there is no dead end.  

[Stargazer]

21 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

I think I see a flaw in this reasoning Robert. While the birth rates may be higher among religious people, what prevents  the offspring of religious people from becoming  secularist?

Did you read the article that his link went to?

Of course, nothing prevents it.  But...

[Ahab]

2 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The handwriting has been on the wall now for a long time.  There is nothing new in these demographic facts, and anecdotal observations are irrelevant.  

Here is an article in Scientific American: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/gods-little-rabbits-religious-people-out-reproduce-secular-ones-by-a-landslide/ .

Here are figures from Pew Research Center:  https://www.pewresearch.org/topics/birth-rate-and-fertility/project/religion/ .

For every reference you can cite I'm sure I could find people who would say the opposite thing.  Even scientists have opposing view points.  I'm too lazy to look for references though so you can just take that as my opinion instead of issuing the much feared and dreaded CFR.

[Ahab]

9 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

Not sure why this is even in dispute. As long as religious people can produce secular offspring, there is no dead end.  

Another way around the problem.  Like the scientist guy said in the Jurassic Park movie, life finds a way.

And, of course, secular people who become religious people are also reproducing themselves, even if they have to become religious to do it.

[Stargazer]

2 minutes ago, Ahab said:

You seem to imagine people as somehow very prone to peer pressure. 

They're not?  I have an idea!  Go get yourself a MAGA hat and parade around with it in New York City on the subway.  You might find yourself highly motivated by peer pressure to remove it.

2 minutes ago, Ahab said:

As if grown adults actually care what other people think about their beliefs or lack of beliefs. 

Just because you and I don't, doesn't mean that others cannot care.

2 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Enough for those adults to put on a show for others to try to trick them or make them believe they believe what those other people believe.  I won't ask if you are serious about and instead just say that in my experience people are not that concerned with what other people believe or with what other people believe about their beliefs.  It's not like we're still in high school and trying to fit in with the cool crowd.  "What other people think is their problem if they don't agree with what I think" is the general attitude I've noticed from most of the people I have met since I left high school, and some people in high school weren't all that impressed by peer pressure either.

The difference with Muslim communities is that peer pressure is a bit higher pressure than things might have been in High School amongst the Sophomore class.  Do you seriously expect that women in, say, Tehran, Iran, feel completely free to walk about in public in the same clothing they wear inside their houses?  How about in Saudi Arabia?  

I believe I was talking about a religion which, on paper at least, urges that those who apostatize be put to death.  Or which in some places enforces the death penalty for saying something offensive about the religion's founder.  I wasn't talking about downtown Las Vegas, Nevada.  You can come to Salt Lake City and screech at the Mormons during General Conference, but better not try a similar act in Mecca during the Haj.

Note that I am not trying to disparage Islam. Just pointing out some salient facts that might be disturbing to some, but which are facts nevertheless.  Islamic peer pressure can have teeth. And if Islam is the true religion, then there's no problem with it.

[Ahab]

2 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

They're not?  I have an idea!  Go get yourself a MAGA hat and parade around with it in New York City on the subway.  You might find yourself highly motivated by peer pressure to remove it.

Just because you and I don't, doesn't mean that others cannot care.

The difference with Muslim communities is that peer pressure is a bit higher pressure than things might have been in High School amongst the Sophomore class.  Do you seriously expect that women in, say, Tehran, Iran, feel completely free to walk about in public in the same clothing they wear inside their houses?  How about in Saudi Arabia?  

I believe I was talking about a religion which, on paper at least, urges that those who apostatize be put to death.  Or which in some places enforces the death penalty for saying something offensive about the religion's founder.  I wasn't talking about downtown Las Vegas, Nevada.  You can come to Salt Lake City and screech at the Mormons during General Conference, but better not try a similar act in Mecca during the Haj.

Note that I am not trying to disparage Islam. Just pointing out some salient facts that might be disturbing to some, but which are facts nevertheless.  Islamic peer pressure can have teeth. And if Islam is the true religion, then there's no problem with it.

Oh, okay, I'm picking up on your drift now.  The Muslims!  THOSE Muslims!  Yeah, well, okay, I will admit that some Muslims do tend to care about what other Muslims think about them and their beliefs or lack of beliefs.

Muslims!  Yeah some of those people can be very violent and will actually kill a woman for not wearing a whole lot of clothing!

I don't usually give Muslims or Islam very much thought in my life since there aren't many Muslims I see in my life. I just know they are not members of the true church of Jesus Christ.

[pogi]

48 minutes ago, Ahab said:

You seem to imagine people as somehow very prone to peer pressure.

You seem to imagine people as somehow not...

48 minutes ago, Ahab said:

 As if grown adults actually care what other people think about their beliefs or lack of beliefs.  

If you don’t care what other people think, why do you post here?  I am very curious as to what others think about my beliefs, and it feels good when I find people of similar beliefs.   Why do people write books if they don’t care?  It is human and natural to want to feel accepted or part of a group of similar believers, or to be of good report.   It is unnatural to not care. 

[Jake Starkey]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Meh. Why bother. It’s so much easier to throw shade or quote somebody out of context when you don’t provide a reference. 

Because apparent gaslighting by a leader of the hard right in the church is not the way.

Oaks called opponents "adversaries" while saying they should be opposed civilly: talking out of both sides of his mouth.

https://religionnews.com/2014/10/06/mormon-apostle-civil-fighting-gay-marriage/

 

 

Edited December 4, 2019 by Jake Starkey

[Jake Starkey]

51 minutes ago, Ahab said:

For every reference you can cite I'm sure I could find people who would say the opposite thing.  Even scientists have opposing view points.  I'm too lazy to look for references though so you can just take that as my opinion instead of issuing the much feared and dreaded CFR.

Meh.  Who cares if you take matters out of context and won't cite good sources?

[Stargazer]

4 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Oh, okay, I'm picking up on your drift now.  The Muslims!  THOSE Muslims!  Yeah, well, okay, I will admit that some Muslims do tend to care about what other Muslims think about them and their beliefs or lack of beliefs.

This is in majority Muslim countries, you understand.  There may be peer pressure, too, in Muslim enclaves such as the one in Birmingham (England) that was written about in this article, though they didn't discuss this.  It looks like there is a good degree of community support for folks who are trying to improve themselves.

4 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Muslims!  Yeah some of those people can be very violent and will actually kill a woman for not wearing a whole lot of clothing!

No, no!  Even in majority Muslim countries that is still murder -- wearing insufficient clothing can get you arrested, however, with possible judicial consequences.  But peer pressure does exist.  One of my Muslim acquaintances asked me to put together a web page for his family's Baghdad hospital, which I did, and he liked the mockup I provided. But there turned out to be an unexpected problem: the platform I was using, called Wix, is an Israeli company!  He said he didn't care, but his family certainly would.  So we abandoned the project.  Peer pressure.

4 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I don't usually give Muslims or Islam very much thought in my life since there aren't many Muslims I see in my life. I just know they are not members of the true church of Jesus Christ.

Well, there is where we differ, I guess.  There's a good number of Muslims here in southern England; I pass by a few of them whenever I'm out walking in town. I know a few personally, too, and they're all sterling folks.   But just the other day, on London Bridge, a less-than-sterling gentleman stabbed a number of people and killed two of them.  It's gotten a bit of airplay over here, maybe you heard about it?  Last year my wife and I walked across London Bridge, past a point where another similar misadventure occurred not long thereafter.  It's the 0.01% that gives the rest a bad name.  That article I reference above makes the completely valid complaint that just because some do bad things this shouldn't be laid at the feet of the entire community of coreligionists.  

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, Ahab said:

For every reference you can cite I'm sure I could find people who would say the opposite thing.  Even scientists have opposing view points.  I'm too lazy to look for references though so you can just take that as my opinion instead of issuing the much feared and dreaded CFR.

Sorry, Ahab, the demographic facts are not disputed by anyone.  The statistics are simply standard.  That doesn't mean that people who reject science and logic won't disagree.  After all, there are still people who believe sincerely in a flat Earth.