Is This the Sad Reality for Religious ‘Nones’?

It’s always a safe bet to return to covering the” Nones” when religious writers run out of subjects. Nones, if you are acquainted with the phrase, refers to a population of Americans, often in their 20s and 30s, who have eschewed organized faith. &nbsp,

They may or may not identify themselves as” spiritual but not religious,” but they are already connected to a chapel or a particular trust sect. The explanation might be based on the stress and boredom that plague these age groups or on the falsehood that the statements made by spirituality and the Bible are false. &nbsp,

Many writers readily attribute this exodus to dissatisfaction with church politicization ( MAGA and conservatism are frequently implied ), church silence on environmental issues, or anti-LGBTQ doctrine or attitudes, using a poll or other source of information. Interestingly enough, many of the major Christian denominations have been cut out or experiencing schisms because they have embraced political correctness and its descendants, DEI, CRT, and others. &nbsp,

A new study suggests that all may not be as advertised on the nonreligious side of the aisle and that the Nones does have abandoned their faith in favor of something much darker, even though the Nones may see themselves as politically and socially educated and as having evolved beyond the need for religious and suffocating trappings of religion. &nbsp,

The research, by Philip Truscott of Southwest Baptist University in Missouri, is titled” Rape, Suicide, and the Rise of Religious Nones”, and the philosophical was published in the latest edition of the Journal Sociology and Christianity. According to Truscott, there is a link between the rise of spiritual nones and the increase in homicides and rapes. &nbsp,

In the abstract, Truscott asserts that the existence of social networks that promote or encourage self-control is a key component of his concept, arguing that the rise in assault incidents has resulted from a drop in religious affiliation. According to him, there has been a “positive relationship between the rate of rape on U.S. college campuses since the 2010s.” He notes:

In the four decades 2016 to 2019, there was a major association. The FBI released data in 2018 that shows a correlation between the Nobody level in the 50 states and the rape rate in the US population as of 2018. Was this due to varying reporting rates or real acts? The reporting price explanation is impossible based on recent data. Additionally, the UCR assault rate is in direct correlation with the CDC’s published suicide rates, another violent statistic that is not liable to reporting errors. Because three-quarters of suicides are committed by men, according to this study, suicide rates serve as a proxy for female self-control. Rape is committed increasingly by men, too. From 2014 onward, the association between murder and suicide rates in the USA increased. It is claimed that reducing self-control is due to a possible method that is causing both increased murder and death.

Additionally, Truscott makes reference to a 2012 study that found a link between increased having and using fun drugs:

It is understandable that atheists and agnostics feel free to indulge in self-indulgence when the element of spiritual self-regulation is removed because it is frequently depicted as a “victimless” crime. McCauley and others noted this. ( 2010 ), binge-drinking, marijuana, and illicit drugs were all associated with increased probabilities of rape, in which case these victimless crimes succeeded in finding victims. To put it another way, some non-religious people made a little social move into substance use and therefore, in a reduced status of self-control, made a much larger one into crime.

Correlation, of course, is not causation. It would be absurd to say that rejecting religion is automatically going to face a police report or worse, but Truscott’s perspective is admirable. And one might argue that his findings add another sign of cultural decline. One might find the tenets of religion to be restrictive, narrow-minded, and even primitive. &nbsp,

However, faith, even a flawed one, can provide a lens through which to see the world and an understanding that there are expectations on the individual. Nothing prevents you from expecting everyone else to live your truth, whatever it may be right now, so you can reject guardrails because you find them too restricting and because they prevent you from living your truth. &nbsp,

It is an accurate and fair assertion that over the course of civilization, some religions have placed undue, unfair, and, at times, loathsome burdens on people and have been responsible for inflicting pain. This is supported by ample evidence. Nevertheless, in the 21st century, society and the individual have become atomized. &nbsp,

Social media has transformed people and communities. Gratification through a smartphone is almost always instantaneous. One can choose one’s gender, pronouns, and, in some cases, even race, or at least believe one can. The messenger’s ability to support a particular worldview determines whether a message is true, and its credibility depends on that fact. &nbsp,

And make no mistake, worldviews can change in a moment. Ask anyone who has ever bent the knee to stifle culture. We are about to make a reality that is as fluid as mercury and as understandable. There are few, if any unifying elements, and the center has been lost. The Nones may have broken their ominous faith-binding, but they are now falling into a free fall. Our post-modern prophets promised to deliver us from stunted, patriarchal, heliocentric medieval thinking but delivered chaos instead.

Source credit