Category Archives: Atheist

Keir Starmer has promised to introduce a Labour bill to protect women and girls in the wake of the death of Sarah Everard.

The Labour leader said that the 33-year-olds abduction and killing as she walked home to Clapham in south London was a watershed moment for the UK on the scale of the deaths of Stephen Lawrence and Jamie Bulger.

The bill, to be published before next months Queens Speech, would make it an offence to harass women on the street, increase sentences for rapists and stalkers and introduce whole life jail terms for those guilty of abduction and sexual assault and murder of a stranger.

It would end the anomaly that sees men convicted of killing their partner at home receiving sentences as much as 10 years shorter than those who murder a stranger in the street.

The pledge came in an interview with the Sunday Times, in which Sir Keir also pronounced himself a monarchist and a patriot, but also confirmed that he does not believe in God.

Keir Starmer opposes vaccine passport plansPublic want to keep vaccine passports even after pandemic overDavid Cameron lobbied No 10 and Hancock over Greensill

This would make him the first prime minister to be a declared atheist if he reaches 10 Downing Street.

In a swipe at Boris Johnson, Starmer said that he regards the core values in political leadership are principle and integrity and dignity, and added: He doesnt have them.

Inside Politics newsletterThe latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox every weekday

Inside Politics newsletterThe latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox every weekday

And I dont want to be Boris Johnson, said the Labour leader. Im not like Boris Johnson in any respect. Theres almost nothing we have in common.

In an implicit criticism of the Johnson government, Starmer said it was astonishing that in 2021 we do not have a comprehensive piece of legislation to protect women and girls.

Mr Johnson has been coming under increasing pressure to publish his long-promised strategy on tackling violence against women and girls.

Discussing the legislation which Labour is drafting, Starmer said: The more I turn it over in my mind the more obvious it is. I dont care whether Im a supporter of it, or the Labour Party, or its cross-party, or even the government takes it on. Because we cant go on like this.

Metropolitan Police officer Wayne Couzens, 48, has been charged with the kidnap and murder of Ms Everard, 33, whose death led to an outpouring of grief, with women gathering for a vigil on Clapham Common, where flowers were piled high around the bandstand near to the spot where she disappeared.

Controversy over heavy-handed policing of the vigil led to calls for Met commissioner Cressida Dick to resign.

But Sir Keir said that views on Dicks handling of the event should not distract from the more important issues raised by Ms Everards death.

Instead of us talking about what women in Clapham wanted us to talk about, we started a discussion about Cressida Dick, which wasnt the issue, he said.

The Sarah Everard case is a Stephen Lawrence or Jamie Bulger moment. This could be a chance to actually do something.

See the original post:

Keir Starmer promises bill to protect women and girls in wake of Sarah Everard killing - The Independent

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints held its biannual general conference over the weekend, and one particular statement from that lengthy gathering is worth discussing on this site.

At one point during his speech yesterday, the LDS Churchs President Russell M. Nelson explained that everyone will struggle in life, in different ways, but the solution was always the same: Increase your faith. But then he kept talking

You can hear it at the 2:37:12 mark:

Your mountains may be loneliness, doubt, illness, or other personal problems. Your mountains will vary, and yet the answer to each of your challenges is to increase your faith.

That takes work. Lazy learners and lax disciples will only struggle to muster even a particle of faith.

Thats a lie. People who dont have religious faith dont come to that conclusion because theyre lazy or lacking the ability to learn. Its usually the opposite. Theyre actually challenging the Churchs dogma. Theyre questioning their beliefs and demanding better answers, only to realize those dont exist.

Its a slap in the face to ex-Mormons everywhere to suggest they left the fold due to laziness rather than serious reflections about their religious beliefs.

The fact that the head of the Mormon Church doesnt realize why people are leaving the faith is, in fact, part of the reason so many Mormons are leaving the faith.

Nelson said a few minutes later that anyone questioning their faith should stop increasing your doubts by rehearsing them with other doubters in other words, got questions that challenge Church doctrine? Dont talk to an atheist. Dont talk to anyone who might take those doubts seriously. Only speak to the devout!

Theyre scared. The best answer Mormons have for people questioning their faith is to keep their grievances private while the Church belittles those who have walked away.

For what its worth, the ex-Mormon subreddit today is full of people posting their college and grad school diplomas so much for being lazy learners.

But these kinds of statements arent harmless. What Nelson says goes a long way in informing how Mormon leaders treat people with doubts. Instead of suggesting their questions ought to be taken seriously, Nelsons words urge other leaders to look down on those doubters as if theyre deficient in some way. The stigma against skeptics just got worse.

Remember: If youre trying to leave the Mormon Church for good, there are resources out there to help you do it as painlessly as possible.

Link:

Mormon Church President: People Who Have Religious Doubts Are Lazy Learners - Friendly Atheist - Patheos

A photograph of a rioting mob has been shared amid West Bengal elections with the claim that it depicts violence against Hindus in Hooghly. #StandWithBengalHindus is the hashtag used along with the claim.

Multiple Twitter accounts have shared the image.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

A simple reverse image search takes one to a May 5, 2013 article published in Daily Mail where the same image has been used. Protesters armed with sticks flee from police tear gas: The Islamic hardliners are demanding the death penalty for blasphemy, reads its description. The image has been credited to photographer Ibrahim of former photo agency Demotix.

The article reported, 37 people were killed and hundreds more injured in Bangladesh today in fierce street fighting between police and Islamic hardliners demanding the death penalty for blasphemy.

Al Jazeera reported that the protests were led by supporters of Hefazat-e-Islam, an Islamist group, against what they said were blasphemous writings by atheist bloggers. The protestors shouted, God is great hang the atheist bloggers. The riots took place in the capital Dhaka.

Bangladeshi PM Sheikh Hasina rejected demands by Islamists for a new anti-blasphemy law granting the death penalty and said that existing laws were sufficient to punish those who attempted to insult religion.

An eight-year-old image of riots in Bangladesh where protestors demanded the death penalty for blasphemy has been shared as violence against Hindus in Hooghly, West Bengal.

Donate Now

Related

Read the original post:

Image of 2013 Bangladesh riots shared as violence against Hindus in West Bengal - Alt News

The term new atheism was coined by the journalist Gary Wolf. He used it in a 2006 article for Wired entitled The Church of the Non-Believers. The chief representatives of Wolfs new atheism were Richard Dawkins, Sam Harrisand Daniel Dennett. What unites these thinkers, more than anything else, is their conviction that theism is not just unjustified, but pernicious: it must be rigorously opposed.

The label new atheism has stuck. Whether it is appropriate is a further question. Dawkins doesnt think so. In the preface to the tenth edition of The God Delusion, he writes: It isnt clear to me how we differ from old atheists.

One thing that new atheists certainly share with many of their predecessors is the belief that we can discredit theism in the same way that we can discredit a faulty scientific hypothesis: by appeal to a combination of evidence and logical reasoning.

You cant escape the scientific implications of religion, Dawkins said in a debate with the then archbishop of York John Habgood.A universe with a God would look quite different from a universe without one Religion is a scientific theory.

If Dawkins is right, then theists and atheists disagree about what we should believe on the basis of observation. Clearly, Dawkins himself thinks that our observations tell against theism. But he also thinks we can imagine observations that would tell in its favour.

In fact, Dawkins thinks we can imagine observations that would tell conclusively in theisms favour. If he existed and chose to reveal it, Dawkins writes in The God Delusion, God himself could clinch the argument, noisily and unequivocally, in his favour.

What observations does Dawkins think would leave us with no alternative but to acknowledge that God exists? We can certainly imagine all sorts of ear-splitting goings-on that would indicate hitherto unacknowledged forces at work in the universe, and they might even lead us to posit the existence of some being of far greater power and intelligence than us. But God?

Whatever conclusive observations Dawkins has in mind, most theists will say that if such observations are what would clinch the argument in favour of Gods existence, then no wonder that Dawkins is an atheist! On any remotely sophisticated conception, God is transcendent in a way that precludes any evidencenoisy, unequivocal, or otherwiseeither for Gods existence or against it. That is why theists typically regard Gods existence as a matter of faith.

But if God transcends evidence in the way theists maintain, then they face another worry: i.e., that their claims about God, including the very claim that God exists, lack meaning.

[see also:What the New Atheists got wrong]

This worry wasexpressed by the early 20th-century philosophers known as logical positivists. Logical positivists had much in common with new atheists. They shared arespect for science;many of them shared the conviction that theism is pernicious;and when they classified a claim as meaningless, they meant that it lacked what they sometimes called literal meaning: it could not be confirmed or disconfirmed in the way a scientific hypothesis couldby appeal to a combination of evidence and logical reasoning.

Nevertheless, there are various reasons why new atheists should not view logical positivists as simple allies. For one thing, as the British logical positivist AJ Ayer used to emphasise, if the claim that God exists is meaningless, then so is the claim that God does not exist. This is why Ayer denied he was an atheist. But more importantly, logical positivists were always among the first to insist there are different ways to make sense of things beyond literal meaning.

A claim that lacked literal meaning could still express feelings (This music is heart-rending)or register some sort of commitment (I give you my word) or condemn certain courses of action (Using your own children as unwilling decoys is unconscionable)or perform countless other functions. The fact that there are different ways to make sense of things leaves room for the view that religious claims, though lacking in literal meaning, still have meaning of some other kind.

There is a noteworthy passage in Language, Truth and Logic in which Ayer concludes that religious claims do not serve the same function as scientific claims and then says: An interesting feature of this conclusion is that it accords with what many theists are accustomed to say themselves.

To be sure, there are now huge questions about what other kind of meaning religious claims may have. But unless we are simply deaf to the possibility that there are ways of making sense of things that are very different from any scientific way of making sense of things, we shall recognise these as legitimate and important questions.

It seems to me that one of the first and most basic things we need to acknowledge about theism, if we are properly going to reckon with it, is that it is precisely not what Dawkins takes it to be a scientific hypothesis.

Adrian Moore is professor of philosophy and tutorial fellow at St Hughs College, Oxford. He is the author of The Infinite, Points of Viewand The Evolution of Modern Metaphysics.

This article is part of the Agora series, a collaboration between the New Statesman and Aaron James Wendland, senior research fellow in philosophy at Massey College, Toronto. He tweets @aj_wendland.

Read more here:

What the New Atheists miss about the meaning of God - New Statesman

Studies have repeatedly found that religion is good for mental health; people who are religious or spiritual report being happier, less depressed and more satisfied with their lives.

Does that mean the opposite is true that atheists are less happy and more depressed?

Finding answers to those questions was the aim of Godless in the Great White North: Assessing the Health of Canadian Atheists, a new study by David Speed, a professor of psychology at the University of New Brunswick.

Using information from the 2012 Canadian Community Health Survey, Speed and co-researchers Caitlin Barry, also of UNB, and Ryan Cragun of the University of Tampa, compared the mental health of those who said they were highly religious and those who said they were atheists.

The results? While the data showed people who are actively involved in their places of worship reported better mental health outcomes, so did atheists.

"We know higher levels of religiosity equals good mental health, but that doesnt mean lower levels of religiosity means poor mental health," Speed said in an interview.

Why do religious people report better mental health outcomes? The answer, said Speed, is social support people feel better if they are actively involved with others in a church, mosque, synagogue, temple, gurdwara or other place of worship.

Or as he put it, being religious itself is not the reason for better mental health, but it is indirectly responsible since it can "provide a warm and supportive social environment."

People who are not religious can get the same benefit, he said, by regularly spending time with others things like meeting regularly with friends, playing on a sports team, being part of book clubs or other activities.

"Atheists who had strong social networks had strong mental health outcomes," he said.

At the same time Speed who is not religious recognizes that religion has some built-in advantages when it comes to providing social support such as an organized system of looking after its members.

This includes having pastoral staff whose job it is to look in on or connect with people on a regular basis, or designated volunteers who provide various kinds of interaction and care when people are sick or under stress.

Then there are the regular services, potlucks, home groups and other gatherings that ensure people have someplace to go to meet others and find the social support they need.

Of course, the quality of the social support provided by a religious community is key. If it is a bad or toxic environment if there is conflict, disputes over theology and practice, oppressive leadership or if the groups beliefs make some people feel unwelcome it can be bad for mental health.

Speeds study is one of a growing number that are starting to research the impact of declining religiosity in Canada and the U.S. This includes examining the rise of the nones people who claim no affiliation with any religious group.

By going deeper into data, researchers like Speed are discovering the nones arent a homogenous group. Not everyone who claims to be one is an atheist, he said; many are still spiritual. These people have been dubbed "theistic nones," people who still have a strong belief in God.

Interestingly, at least one study has found the level of certainty in beliefs either for or against the existence of God is a factor for predicting positive mental health outcomes.

According to Luke Galen, a professor of psychology at Grand Valley State University in Michigan who is doing research into this subject, both ardent believers and committed atheists report greater overall well-being than either believers or atheists who were unsure or confused about their belief in God.

For Galen, those getting the least benefit are those in the middle, people who "lack of coherence in their worldview."

In other research, Galen found that atheists could get the same benefits as religious people by being active in humanist or atheist groups something echoed by Joseph Baker, a sociologist of religion at East Tennessee State University.

In an interview with Religion News Service, he said while atheism can give people as strong a sense of identity as religion can for believers, and may help with their mental well-being, the challenge for them is "think consciously and seriously about where they will find community and organize accordingly," he said.

As for Speed, he hopes more research will be done about the question of religion, atheism and health.

"Atheists are not well studied," he said. "But there is an explosion in this area with the growth of nones."

faith@freepress.mb.ca

John LonghurstFaith reporter

John Longhurst has been writing for Winnipeg's faith pages since 2003. He also writes for Religion News Service in the U.S., and blogs about the media, marketing and communications at Making the News.

Read full biography

See more here:

Researchers study mental health of believers, atheists - Winnipeg Free Press

Church attendance is at an all time low and the pandemic doesnt deserve the blame.

(Congratulations, everyone. We did it. Extra cookies for everyone at the next meeting.)

According to a new Gallup poll, only 47% of Americans say they belong to a house of worship, marking the first time ever that the number has dipped below 50%. Its a continuation of a trend that began decades ago but has been accelerating in recent years.

Whats the cause for this change? Gallup says the main factor is the rise of people with no religious preference at all not just atheists, but believers who want nothing to do with organized religion.

The decline in church membership is primarily a function of the increasing number of Americans who express no religious preference. Over the past two decades, the percentage of Americans who do not identify with any religion has grown from 8% in 1998-2000 to 13% in 2008-2010 and 21% over the past three years.

Heres whats especially interesting about that: You would expect the Nones not to go to church. But even among religious people, church membership is in decline. In 2000, roughly 73% of believers belonged to a religious institution. That number is now sitting at 60%.

Even more damning? Those numbers are tilted in the direction of the elderly. Only 36% of Millennials says they belong to a church (or mosque or synagogue) compared to 66% of those born before 1946. Every age bracket has seen a decline in church attendance, and that includes young people who werent going to church in large numbers to begin with.

In other words, the trend lines arent looking good for religious leaders no matter how you parse the data.

Let me repeat that. Theres a decline in church membership no matter which group youre looking at. Compared to two decades ago, theres been a drop in attendance among non-college graduates (22% drop), single people (22%), Republicans (12%), Conservatives (14%), and people who live in the South (16%).

Gallup makes clear that anyone who blames these numbers solely on COVID is missing the point:

The U.S. remains a religious nation, with more than seven in 10 affiliating with some type of organized religion. However, far fewer, now less than half, have a formal membership with a specific house of worship. While it is possible that part of the decline seen in 2020 was temporary and related to the coronavirus pandemic, continued decline in future decades seems inevitable, given the much lower levels of religiosity and church membership among younger versus older generations of adults.

Gallup doesnt get into why all this is happening, but I would argue that you could safely assign blame to the right-wing politicization of many prominent churches (and entire denominations), the consistent bigotry many religions still harbor against LGBTQ people, the sex abuse scandals, the treatment of women, the abundance of resources for people questioning or leaving their faith, and the fact that so many more Americans now know non-religious people (and realize were not monsters).

While its true that certain individual churches with hard-core right-wing Trump-loving messages may have grown in size over the years theres certainly an audience for Christian Nationalism those same tactics also push away anyone whos on the fence about faith or whose religious beliefs dont align with those views. (Im hoping the Republican Party itself sees the same fate: Theyll be just fine in Mississippi, Im sure, but there will be hell to pay in the long run in states like Georgia.)

Ultimately, the reason for the decline in church attendance seems to have more to do with the actions (and inactions) of religious leaders than any coordinated push away from organized religion. Pastors ought to look in the mirror before they blame atheists (or a virus) for whats happening to religion in America.

Happy early Easter.

(Featured image via Shutterstock)

Read more here:

Congratulations, Atheists: Church Attendance in America is at an All-Time Low. - Friendly Atheist - Patheos

AS A legislator, columnist, and quasi-raconteur, I do enjoy back-and-forth regarding sports, politics, and more. But I generally avoid getting into religion. Still, as someone who feels that vibrant religious communities with their associated values and activities are important parts of a healthy society, I sometimes get cognitive dissonance about avoiding the topic. Some might call it conscience.

Which brings me to a friend Ill call Ed. Hes a non-believer with whom I have conversed about religion. Being a former Marine, I once asked Ed if he believed Marines had esprit de corps.

Of course, said Ed.

French expression meaning spirit of the corps, replied Ed. A common feeling of pride and purpose that motivates the group. Sure, Marines have it in spades.

Can a sports team have it?

Sure. If it has good leadership and a common purpose.

So you believe in this particular esprit, or spirit? Even though you cant see or touch it?

Yes, laughed Ed. Of course.

Can a religious group also be animated or motivated by an esprit de corps, like Marines or sports teams?

So what if religious folks claim theyre motivated by a special esprit de corps that they refer to as a holy spirit?

Ed is silent. Having already acknowledged the existence of esprit, he wont use the English word for it. He saw where I was going. To admit the existence of a Holy Spirit which is what some religious folks refer to as an animating esprit that inspires them is essentially to admit the existence of God, in that some Christian doctrines describe the Holy Spirit as the third person of the Trinity, or God as spiritually active in the world.

Without listing names, there are many transformative figures throughout human history who, clearly inspired by a certain esprit (Holy Spirit?), have provided humankind with lessons, parables, belief structures, and inspiration to live good and productive lives. And happy ones too.

Countless surveys and research document that the religious are more generous and happier than non-religious. With exceptions of course, but the data is out there. Google away.

I ask Ed to consider the incredible good work that programs like Catholic Charities do around the world effectively and efficiently. What do atheist charities do? Might Ed be happier if he donated wherewithal or energy to one of the many wonderful religious charities?

I pay taxes, says Ed. The government does a lot of good work.

And I dont need to go to church for a spiritual experience. I can get that by climbing a mountain.

But isnt that a bit narcissistic? Isnt there strength in numbers as well as value to being part of a group or community animated by an esprit/spirit to do public good and help people?

Ed laughed. But at least he didnt get personal. A challenge for some of us when we summon nerve to talk about religion or values is that we must brace for criticism.

Who are you to talk about this stuff, given all your foibles, flaws, and sins? And what about all the hypocritical religious people who do bad things?

Some require an unattainable measure of perfection from the inherently imperfect before theyll engage them about religion a perfection not expected from others before discussing other things.

But we drift away from our historical religious roots at our own peril. Witness the growing coarseness, alienation and violence that seems to accompany Americas increasing secularization. New Hampshire is rated as the least religious state. It also features about the highest rate of substance abuse. A correlation?

History is replete with religious conflict. True. As well as plenty of anti-religious violence. After the horrific French Revolution, Paris Notre Dame cathedral was converted by the secular to what they called a Temple of Reason. After the horrific Russian Revolution, official atheism shut down the churches. Soviet dictator Josef Stalin ridiculed religious influence, asking How many divisions can the Pope deploy?

Funny thing though. Notre Dame Cathedral eventually returned to religious splendor. And churches are now open all over Russia even as some are closing in New Hampshire. The Holy Spirit can be ridiculed, quashed, or denied, but its apparently eternal as it provides hope and inspiration for individuals and communities to take kinder, gentler paths

Easter Sunday is April 4. A chance for Ed to pick out a church and perhaps witness some real esprit first-hand.

State Representative Mike Moffett of Loudon is a retired professor and former Marine Corps officer.

More:

Mike Moffett: Educating Ed and Easter | Op-eds | unionleader.com - The Union Leader

Say what you will, but we all have a superstition or two we cant seem to shake...

In no instance has a New Jersey Mega Millions winner attributed hiswindfall to a ladybug.

In no New Jersey nursing home has a 113-year-old woman said: "I owe it all to the ladybugs."

Despite suchhard evidence, New Jersey's number one superstition, according to a recent survey, is ... ladybugs bringgood luck.

"The number of dots on them is the number of years you have good luck," saidMatt Zajechowski,researcher and spokesmanforPotawatomi Hotel & Casino in Milwaukee.

Ladybugs are New Jersey's favorite superstition(Photo: Photo by Andy Barron, RGJ)

In the U.S., superstitions vary by region, theirstudy found.

This research was done, to be clear, for publicity purposes: Potawatomi Casino is in the luck business. But there was method to it.

Entertainment: At Loew's Jersey Theatre, ushers were spectacular. This 95-year-old brings it all back

New Jersey: Here are five of the most harmful invasive insects that have wreaked havoc in New Jersey

A team of five(Zajechowski was one of them) analyzed Google search volume for 200 superstitions, and broke the results down state by state. They also did a survey of 1000 Americans, across all 50 states.

It turns out that superstitions are as varied as we are.

Black cats are the reigning fear in South Carolina, while folks are more worried about owls in Oregon. Lucky pennies are the No. 1 charm in California and Texas, while four-leaf clovers (Massachusetts), lucky rabbit's feet (Mississippi) and lucky numbers (Nevada) are the fashion elsewhere.

In South Carolina, the number one superstition is black cats(Photo: 1964 file photo/The Capital-Journal)

With us, it's ladybugs.

And we're not alone. Ladybugs are No. 5 on the country's superstition hit parade. The top four, in order, are (1) throwing salt over your shoulder, (2) bad luck comes in threes (3) a rabbit's foot is good luck (4) Friday the 13th is an unlucky day.

"All of these are old,"Zajechowski said. "They have these long historical meanings. If you looked at this 150 years ago, the beliefs would probably have been very similar. It's almost like it's passed down from one generation to another."

For a supposedly hard-nosed people, Americans are very superstitious and that's nothing new.

In New York, the alleged seat of sophistication, high-rises used to be built without 13th floors the elevator would go from 12 to 14. In the 1920s H.L. Mencken, America's most famous atheist and skeptic, freely confessed to allkinds of irrational beliefs. "Like all other infidels, I am superstitious and always follow hunches," he said.

So why ladybugs, and whythe Garden State? Well, there could be part of your answer.

We are or were a state of farmers. "There may be a tie-in with the Garden State heritage, that makes people embrace them,"Zajechowski said.

Few omens, good or bad, have such a wealth of lore around them as the ladybug.Here, according toZajechowski, are some of the other ancillary superstitions that are connected withCoccinellidae otherwise known as the ladybird beetle.

Story continues below the video

There's a lot to learn from the way lady bugs fold their wings. Researchers say it's 'origami-like' and understanding them could help redesign many things like umbrellas!

Ladybugs mean good weather.

Killing ladybugs is bad luck.

Catching a ladybug,wishing, lettingit go, and watching where it flies off to will let you know from which direction your good luck will "come from."

Counting ladybug spots will tell you how many children you will have.

Finding a ladybug with no spots means you will find true love.

Ladybugs with seven or less spots are the sign of a good harvest.

A ladybug is captured in a drawing by Anna Karas.(Photo: Ken Cleveland photo)

An unmarried woman who has a ladybug land on her will be married within a year.

Yellow ladybugs are a sign of new love, new adventure, new travel.

Ifa man and woman see a ladybug at the same time, they will fall in love. (Apparently, that lastapplies only to Norway.)

"People believe they are beacons of good luck,"Zajechowski said. "And they've been embraced by pop culture. Kids' sports teams are named The Ladybugs. All this girls' stuff, school stuff, has ladybugs on it."

Many people, no doubt, like ladybugs because they're cute. Cute as a bug, in fact.They're so tiny! So orange! There is a reason why people buy ladybug handbags, lipstick, knapsacks, umbrellas, toys,jewelry, pajamas, boots, underwear, dinnerware, towels, books, ponchos, decorative accents, costumes. A cockroach just doesn't have the same je ne sais quoi.

"Ladybug Girl" is a children's book that features the ladybug motif. Probably not the first, or the last(Photo: Sheri Trusty/Correspondent)

"There are probably just as many ants as ladybugs, but they are not as appealing,"Zajechowski said. "Ladybugs are not going to ruin your picnic."

But there'sanother reason for the ladybug superstition. Ladybugs are good luck.

"There is noquestion that they are good guys," saidJoel Flagler, professor and agricultural extension agent for Rutgers University.

"They prey on undesirable insects, so they are considered beneficial predators," Flagler said. "Ladybugs will hunt down aphids and just feast on them all day. And they will do that, even in their larval stage. They are voracious predators."

That's why farmers like them. And why greenhouse growers will buy them from suppliers and release them indoors.

For subscribers: 7 new North Jersey restaurants to try now: Vegan, burgers, Mexican and more

Holidays: Meals are about people. And this holiday season, people are back together again

There are 5,000 species of ladybug; the one we're most familiar with in New Jersey is the Asian ladybug, which over the last few decades has muscled in on the native species. "The Asian ladybug is a little bit bigger than the native, otherwise it looks the same and behaves the same," Flagler said.

It's a bit early for them right now, Flagler said. Generally around May is when the larvae hatch. "They look like little dragons with scales, orange and black," he said.Between May and July, depending on the temperature, is when they metamorphose into their adult stage. But the season they really make their presence felt is the fall, when they begin to swarm.

"It's the cold weather," Flagler said. "As the nights start to get cold, they congregate to conserve heat. They congregate on the south-facing sides of buildings, where it's warmer. They hang out in south-facing windows. They're congregating for warmth. Many insects do it."

Farmers love ladybugs. They are natural predators of unwanted species(Photo: Getty Images / karandaev)

Whatever else our love of ladybugs may say about us, itmay benoteworthy is that we embrace a positive omen a bringer of good, rather than bad, luck. It suggests that we Jerseyans are an optimistic people

And indeed, that seems to applyto a majority of Americans, the survey found. Of the 1,000 people interviewed, 65 percent said they were superstitious. Of that group, 83 percent said they believed in good luck; 50 percent believed in bad.

"We found," Zajechowskisaid, "more people were optimistic about superstitions."

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Jim Beckerman is an entertainment and culture reporter for NorthJersey.com. For unlimited access tohis insightfulreports about how you spend your leisure time,please subscribe or activate your digital account today.

Email:beckerman@northjersey.com

Twitter:@jimbeckerman1

Read or Share this story: https://www.northjersey.com/story/entertainment/columnists/jim-beckerman/2021/03/31/ladybugs-new-jersey-top-superstition/6954960002/

Continued here:

What is New Jersey's most popular superstition? (Hint: It brings good luck) - Asbury Park Press

Catholics are divided along party lines on whether Biden should be allowed to receive Communion

Shadowed by security detail, Joe Biden leaves St. Joseph on the Brandywine Roman Catholic Church,his home church inWilmington, Delaware,on Jan. 9, 2021. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

How we did this

Pew Research Center conducted this survey to measure what Americans know and think about the religious faith of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. The study also explores Catholics attitudes about whether Catholic politicians including Joe Biden should be barred from receiving Communion if they disagree with the Catholic Churchs teachings about a variety of political issues. For this report, we surveyed 12,055 U.S. adults (including 2,492 Catholics) from March 1 to 7, 2021. All respondents to the survey are part of the Centers American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national random sampling of residential addresses. This way nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education, religious affiliation and other categories. For more, see the ATPs methodology and the methodology for this report.

The questions used in this report can be found here.

Joe Biden is just the second Catholic president in U.S. history, after John F. Kennedy. Most U.S. adults know that Biden is Catholic, including majorities within both major political parties, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.

But partisan similarities in views about Bidens religion end there. Republicans and Democrats have vastly different views about how religious Biden is and whether he talks about his religious faith too much, too little or the right amount. This political divide extends even to Bidens fellow Catholics, who are deeply split along party lines over whether Bidens views about abortion should disqualify him from receiving Communion.

Overall, roughly six-in-ten U.S. adults including 63% of Democrats and independents who lean toward the Democratic Party, along with a slightly smaller majority of Republicans and Republican leaners (55%) say Joe Biden is Catholic. Most of the remainder say they are not sure what Bidens religion is, while about one-in-ten say that Biden practices a religion other than Catholicism or that he is not religious. A small handful of Republicans volunteer that Biden is a fake Catholic or a Catholic in name only, or offer other insulting comments.

While majorities in both parties know that Biden is Catholic, they disagree profoundly about the role of religion in his private and public life. Nearly nine-in-ten Democrats say that Biden is at least somewhat religious, including 45% who say they think he is a very religious person. By contrast, almost two-thirds of people who identify with or lean toward the GOP (63%) say that Biden is not too or not at all religious.

On the whole, the share of Americans who say Biden is a very or somewhat religious person has risen from 55% in February 2020 to 64% today. Over that period, there has been a particularly pronounced increase in the share of Americans who say Biden is very religious (from 9% in February 2020 to 27% today). But virtually all of this increase has happened among Democrats; among members of Bidens own party, 13% described him as very religious early last year, compared with 45% today.

It is possible that Democrats heard Biden talking about his faith on the campaign trail and since his election. Religion has been a consistent theme in his remarks in recent months, from the Democratic National Convention to his victory speech in November to his inauguration in January.

While eight-in-ten Democrats (79%) say Joe Biden mentions his religious faith and prayer about the right amount, fewer than half of Republicans (42%) agree.

Even among Bidens fellow Catholics, partisanship permeates views of Bidens religion. Nine-in-ten Democratic and Democratic-leaning Catholics say they think Biden is at least somewhat religious, including half who say he is very religious. Among Republican and Republican-leaning Catholics, by contrast, a 56% majority say Biden is not too or not at all religious. And while eight-in-ten Catholic Democrats say they think Biden discusses his faith about the right amount, barely half as many Catholic Republicans say the same (42%).

The survey finds, furthermore, that a slim majority of Catholic Republicans (55%) think that Bidens views about abortion should disqualify him from receiving Communion in the Catholic Church. But nearly nine-in-ten Catholic Democrats (87%) come down on the other side of this question, saying that Biden should be allowed to receive the Eucharist. Biden has said that he wants to make Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision that established a womans right to an abortion nationwide, the law of the land, among other policy changes. As a result, some Catholic clergy have called for Biden to be denied Communion, and U.S. bishops may produce a document on the issue.

These are among the key findings of a new Pew Research Center survey conducted March 1-7, 2021, among 12,055 U.S. adults (including 2,492 Catholics) on the Centers online, nationally representative American Trends Panel. More information on how the survey was conducted is available in the methodology.

In addition to asking about whether Biden should be allowed to receive Communion, the survey also asked Catholics whether, in general, Catholic politicians who disagree with the churchs teachings about a variety of issues should be allowed to go to Communion.

Overall, three-in-ten Catholics say that Catholic political figures who disagree with church teaching about abortion should be barred from Communion. But fewer say this should be the case for those who disagree with the church over homosexuality (19%) or the death penalty (18%), and just one-in-ten say Catholic politicians who disagree with the churchs teachings on immigration should be disqualified from receiving the Eucharist.

There are big partisan differences over whether politicians views about abortion and homosexuality should make them ineligible for Communion. (Both of these are issues on which Catholic teaching might be described as conservative in the context of American politics.) Roughly half of Catholic Republicans (49%) say politicians who support legal abortion should not be able to receive the sacrament; just 15% of Catholic Democrats agree. And there is a partisan gap of 18 percentage points on the question about homosexuality: 30% of Catholic Republicans say politicians should be barred from Communion if they disagree with the church about homosexuality, compared with just 12% of Catholic Democrats who say the same.

On the other two issues raised in the survey the death penalty and immigration, where Catholic teaching might best be described as liberal within the U.S. political context there are no such partisan differences. Large majorities of Catholics in both parties say that Catholic politicians who disagree with the church about these issues should be able to present themselves for Communion.

Combining these questions shows that seven-in-ten Catholic Democrats dont think disagreeing with the church about any of the four issues raised by the survey should disqualify Catholic politicians from receiving Communion.

By contrast, most Republicans say they think it should be disqualifying if a Catholic politician disagrees with the church on at least one of these issues. This includes 18% of Catholic Republicans who think abortion is the sole issue of those presented by the survey that should be a litmus test for receiving Communion, along with 17% of Republicans who name both abortion and one other issue (usually homosexuality). An additional 14% of Catholic Republicans say that three or four of these issues should be grounds for disqualifying Catholic politicians from receiving Communion in the event of a disagreement with the church.

The public is less familiar with Vice President Kamala Harris religious identity than with Bidens, and fewer people say they think Harris is a religious person than say the same about Biden. Two-thirds of U.S. adults say they are not sure what Harris religious identity is, while just 12% say that she is a Protestant (Harris identifies as Baptist).

About half of U.S. adults say they think Harris is a very religious (8%) or somewhat religious person (38%), while the other half say that she is not too religious (28%) or not at all religious (23%). Again, Democrats are far more likely than Republicans to see Harris as at least somewhat religious (69% vs. 19%), although equal shares in both parties say they do not know what Harris religion is (64% each).

The remainder of this report explores these and other findings in more detail.

Two-thirds of U.S. Catholics, including three-quarters of White Catholics, know that Joe Biden shares their religious identity. Three-quarters of U.S. Jews also know that Biden is Catholic, as do two-thirds of self-described atheists and agnostics. Among Black Protestants and those who describe their religion as nothing in particular, roughly half or fewer are able to identify Bidens religion.

Americans are far less familiar with Kamala Harris religion than with Bidens. Overall, about two-thirds of U.S. adults (65%) say they are not sure what the vice presidents religion is. One-in-eight (12%) correctly describe Harris as Protestant, while 3% say she is Hindu. Harris mother was from India and her father was from Jamaica, and she was raised on Hinduism and Christianity, according to Religion News Service.

Majorities across a wide variety of religious groups say they are not sure what Harris religion is. Jews, Black Protestants and self-described atheists and agnostics are able to correctly identify Harris religion at slightly higher rates than those in some other religious groups. Still, even among these most knowledgeable groups, only about one-in-five know that Harris is Protestant.

While Democrats and Republicans are equally likely to say they dont know what Harris religion is, there are differences among those who do give a response. Democrats are more likely to say that Harris is Protestant (18% vs. 7%), while Republicans are more inclined to say that she does not have a religion (15% vs. 3%).

Across a variety of religious groups, sizable majorities say they think Biden is at least somewhat religious, ranging from 60% of White Protestants who are not evangelical to 87% among Black Protestants. There is just one exception to this pattern: Only one-third of White evangelical Protestants (35%) say they think Biden is a religious person, while almost two-thirds (63%) say he is not too or not at all religious.

Fewer people in most religious groups say they think Harris is a very or somewhat religious person. Here again, the view that Harris is a religious person is most common among Black Protestants (78%) and least common among White evangelical Protestants (20%).

These differences among religious groups are in line with patterns of partisanship: Black Protestants are among the most strongly and consistently Democratic constituencies in U.S. politics, while White evangelical Protestants are among the most reliably Republican groups.

The survey also asked respondents about how religious they think former President Donald Trump is, with overall results similar to early 2020. Today, 32% of U.S. adults say Trump is very or somewhat religious, while 67% say he is not too or not at all religious. In February 2020, 35% said Trump was at least somewhat religious and 63% said he was not too or not at all religious.

Six-in-ten U.S. adults say they think Biden mentions his religious faith and prayer about the right amount, while the remainder are divided as to whether he discusses his faith too much (14%) or too little (21%).

Majorities of people in nearly every religious group analyzed express the view that Biden discusses his religion the appropriate amount, topping out at 78% among Black Protestants. White evangelicals are the only group in which fewer than half of respondents say Biden discusses his faith about the right amount (41%); a similar share (39%) say Biden doesnt talk about his faith enough.

Respondents who identify as atheist or agnostic are more likely than other Americans to say Biden discusses his faith too much (28%), but still, two-thirds in this group say Biden talks about religion the right amount (68%).

U.S. Catholics who attend Mass at least once a week are considerably more likely than those who attend Mass less often to say that politicians who disagree with the churchs position on abortion should be ineligible for Communion (42% vs. 24%). Weekly churchgoers also are more inclined than other Catholics to say disagreements over homosexuality and the death penalty are cause for barring politicians from the Eucharist. But there are no differences among Catholics based on frequency of church attendance when it comes to whether politicians who disagree with the church about immigration should be able to receive Communion.

Catholics ages 50 and older are a bit more likely than younger Catholics to say politicians who support abortion rights should be ineligible for Communion, while younger Catholics are slightly more likely than their elders to say a politician who disagrees with church teachings about capital punishment or immigration should be disqualified from Communion.

More specifically, four-in-ten Catholics who attend Mass at least once a week say that Bidens views about abortion should disqualify him from receiving the Eucharist 15 points higher than the share who say this among those who attend Mass less often. White Catholics and those 50 and older are somewhat more inclined than Hispanic Catholics and those under 50 to say Biden should not be allowed to go to Communion.

Read the rest here:

Most Democrats and Republicans Know Biden Is Catholic, but They Differ Sharply About How Religious He Is - Pew Research Center's Religion and Public...

Earlier this month, a church called The Pursuit NW in Snohomish, Washington got a letter from the states attorney general warning them against gathering in person in violation of the states COVID restrictions.

As we know all too well by now, such a sensible request is considered Christian Persecution by religious zealots. Thats why Pastor Russell Johnson created this I-swear-its-not-a-parody video in defiance of those common sense health precautions.

And like a true white evangelical, he made sure to attack trans people while he was at it.

If 25% of the church is allowed to gather, then the church is not allowed to gather. If 50% of the church is allowed to gather, then the church is not allowed to gather.

The same politicians who are telling us to trust the science will also tell us men can be women, women can be men, and babies can be terminated in the womb up until the ninth month.

Let me be clear: I trust the science. What I dont trust is the totalitarian political class and their unfettered lust for power, control, and authority.

And if the attorney general wants to find me, Ill be here, at Pursuit, every Sunday, 9:00, 10:30, and noon. We cancel sickness, we cancel disease, we cancel fear and demons and darkness. We cancel power-hungry politicians. But we aint canceling church.

Hes lying. He doesnt trust the science because hes been denying the seriousness of the pandemic since it began.

Hes lying about his magical powers. He cant cancel sickness and disease because he hasnt done a damn thing to prevent the nearly 550,000 American COVID deaths so far. (Those lives dont matter to him. Only fetuses.) That said, Im eager to see those medical reports confirming his heal count.

But he can absolutely create an environment for COVID to continue spreading. When you jam-pack people into a building with no distancing and virtually no masks and I feel like we can safely assume there are plenty of anti-vaxxers in this crowd the pandemic will not go away.

Unfortunately for everyone else, Johnsons faith-based selfishness and ignorance has the power to infect and kill people who dont belong to his church. Again, he doesnt care. Hes literally making an argument that his church should have the right to put complete strangers in harms way. The people gullible enough to fall for his angry rant dont seem to realize they belong to a death cult.

No ones asking his church to do anything that doesnt also apply to secular spaces that function the same way. Its a sacrifice we all have to make. But Johnson wants people to think Christians are uniquely affected by the pandemic. Thats also a lie. And white evangelical churches have been pushing it for the better part of the past year. Our entire nation has suffered because of people like this.

YouTuber Jake the Atheist who lives near this church posted a reaction video to the pastors rant that is well worth watching. I watched it after I collected my own thoughts on the matter and found that we were on the same wavelength for a lot of this:

Its not clear if Attorney General Bob Ferguson will take any action against the church. I havent seen any articles suggesting it, anyway. But theres no reason a church should be allowed to put people in danger by acting like the rules we all live by dont apply to them.

View original post here:

A Washington Church Created a Bonkers Video Whining About COVID Restrictions - Friendly Atheist - Patheos