From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: Religion In America: Hard Numbers
Organization: LLNL
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 21:22:33 GMT

In article <16jdfqINN456@hal.com> howard@hal.com (Howard Gayle) writes:
>In article <11764@optilink.UUCP>, cramer@optilink (Clayton Cramer) writes:
@ Since about 40% of the population
@attends religious services in any given week, the evidence suggests
@that the majority of Americans, and probably a large majority,
@still hold to their religious beliefs.

	I wonder exactly what was asked. I think it was something like
"went more than 6 times a year", and I doubt if many people's memory
is very trustworthy here (I'm not pretending that mine is much better
on day-to-day details). It may have been for marriages and funerals,
and it may be a mixup with claiming a religious affiliation.

	I question this because I suspect that this is much more than
the capacity of all America's houses of worship. I think I might have
tried to estimate this once. This provides a more reliable check, and
a good check on the reliability of polling.

	Furthermore, it is interesting that in the poll, 69% of people
claim a religious affiliation, while the nation's churches count only
59% of people. A serious gap.

	Flaws like this make one suspicious of the poll. While I think
that polling is a legitimate procedure, I think it should be done
carefully, with careful attention given to possible slants. And I am
disappointed that many potentially important questions are simply not
asked.

	It would be interesting to see how many people are familiar
with all the teachings of whatever religions they profess, or whether
they just go through some ritual motions; a Fundie-type publication
discovered that 80% of Americans profess to believe in the Ten
Commandments, while only 20% could name as many as five of them.

	I think that there are many things in the Bible that many
people would find deeply offensive, and I have a whole list of such
things in my Biblical Satanic Verses, available by e-mail. I am
getting ready to revise them again, and I'd like some input.

	I'm not sure that many people would appreciate the applying of
the Biblical penalty for male homosexual acts -- death.

	And let's see what people will think of these Biblical
teachings:

Paul
states that (1 Corinthians 11) women are to be subject to men in the
same way that men are subject to God; that women exist for the sake of
men, and not men for the sake of women; that men are the image and
glory of God, while women are the image and glory of men; and that
women should keep their heads covered to indicate that they are under
their husbands' authority. Women should wear their hair long in order
to cover their heads, while men are to keep their hair short; this is
because men are the image and glory of God, while women are the image
and glory of men. Also, (1 Corinthians 14:34,35) women are to be
silent in church, and should let their husbands instruct them. (1
Timothy 2:11,12) Women are supposed to learn and not teach. (1 Peter
3:1-7) Women should submit to their husbands and should look plain;
they should call their husbands their masters, as Sarah had called
Abraham.


	I expect a lot of flames from those who object at my portrayal
of the Bible as less than Politically Correct; what choice do I have?


>This assumes that people join a church and attend its services
>for religious reasons.  That sounds obvious, but there are also
>many secular reasons for joining a church, e.g. to meet people
>socially, to make business contacts, to do charitable works, to
>enhance one's reputation, or to take advantage of benefits
>available to church members.  Church activities are often
>life-long traditions.  In Sweden, for example, most people
>attend church once a year, on Christmas Eve.  It's as
>traditional as burning bonfires on 30 April to frighten the
>witches away.

	And another "reason":

	There are those who insist that children be brought up in a
reputable religion so that they will "know abou it". Never mind that
this is like (say) teaching one's kids to be Communists so that they
will know _about_ Communism.

	One wonders how many would draw a blank on religion personally
but would get angry at rejection at our society's "reputable"
religions.

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:40265 alt.politics.elections:10743 alt.politics.clinton:2114 alt.politics.bush:1901