I think it would make some difference, because there are some people like my aunt who believe we need hardship and tragedy to "bring people back to God." It's such a vile perspective, because it amounts to wishing harm on people (or tolerating evil behavior, if not perpetrating it outright) for the sake of some faith-based, religious revival. I think less strife would diminish that sort of thinking in the long run.

It has been shown the biggest thing cutting the effect of religon is a national healthcare plan. People no longer feel the need for an invisible diety to preserve their health when they have a tangible program.

Not if there is a republican running things they must find every dollar the weathy do not need and give it to them at the sacrifice of the majority.

I think if ht egovernment did more, it woudl help.

The whole idea as put forth by republicans that private (and religious) charities woudl step in as they discontinue programs for the poor is ridiculous. I fprivate charities would have doen the job, there woudl be no need for the government programs to behin with.

I am of the opinion that too many charities pay out large slaries and very litte of the money given actually goes to the people who need it. So, a rich persons sits on teh board, draws a huge salary, and it is just another way to con poor people out of their money to benefit the rich.

In other words the whoel idea of charities steping in when government programs are defunded or ended is just another con like "trickle down".

I don't see that the religious amounlt would change for any realistic reason. However, if government were to enforce no religion, that would probably increase it. It sounds stupid I know. Humans, have a tendency to rebel against authority. The governments rejection of religion is the perfect reason for reblling for a lot of people. On the flip side, I think one way to reducereligion, would be to take away tax free status. That could also solve some of our deficit problem, if not all.

No. You cannot fix stupid

I agree that the "slack" needs to be picked up by the government, but maybe not necessarily in the same form as it exists now. I'm actually a very big believer that a living basic income provided to all Americans would kick our economy into a higher gear, along with universal Medicare and Medicaid.

I feel these steps should be taken, regardless of their effects on church attendance. Heck, for all I know, it could lead to people spending every day with their butt in a pew. Really, as much as I would roll my eyes, I'd rather see a bunch of religious folks who are getting the care they need than a reason-centric populace still fighting hunger and homelessness.

We need secular societies, and secular governments. There is an inbalance of secularists in governemts.

Probably no effect at all.Religion is a virus and/or dillusion and very little if anything will affect it.

My experience with churches has been that most of them do very little that is not in their own self interest. I think the religious group would remain about the same. I would add that it is my belief that the Xain religion is in decline.

lol no. Churches don’t do shit either.

Idoubt it but hard to say but they are in bed together with the basic same aim.

I have read and researched several studies along these lines and all indicators point toward a definite link. Just take a look at Scandinavia and large portions of Europe to get an overview of how it plays out. Improve education. Reduce stress. Increase the quality of life. Reduce religiosity. Simple.

There is no question that poverty leads people to be more religious. Those in countries where the economies are strong tend to be more secular.

Federal agencies like the Federal Trade Commission, try to keep people from swindling consummers with fraudulent advertising and claims. IMO they are derelict in their duty,,....they need to prosecute Christian organizations that are swindling the "Sheep."

It is just a fact that many people are followers, they need a purpose for them religion is the easiest route. To boot they have been so brainwashed that they lead their children down the same religious path. The cycle of religious indoctrination is endless.

This country was founded by a group ,puritans, so xenophobic they were asked to leave Europe. It going to take a long time for that fear of the other to go away so long as religion provides scapegoats and justifications for such fears.

Perhaps wealth goes along with superiority many Christians feel they have over others.

Please explain what you mean by "picked up the slack."

I too believe the Conservative viewpoint of relying on religious institutions and charity to solve our socio-economic needs is extremely flawed. It also invites a lot of scams. I thought I heard just the other day a bunch of people got arrested for a scam on the Wounded Warrior project.

As for the idea that it would reduce the influence of religious institutions? Nah. There will always be a segment of the population that needs its gods.

This is an excellent question, although, to me, the real question is whether society should take up the slack. Framing it as a question of big government tends to generate more heat than light. Also, it's not just a question of chuches only, but of private charity generally.

In countries such as Norway where taxes are high and society provides and sustains and optimizes a very pervasive safety net, there is very little private charity because there's very little NEED for it.

People tend to shirk their responsibilities to their fellow man if charity is voluntary. If everyone contributes equally to the common pot as a condition of citizenship I think that's totally fair and tends to produce more equality and more cohesiveness and community.

Here in 'Murica, we have so many exceptions and loopholes that the wealthy plutocracy mostly shirks and the rest of us have a patchwork of often overlapping and ineffective private and public and NGO safety nets, with lots of cracks to fall through. It needs more coordination and commitment. That takes government, sorry to say.

That's a good question! I haven't done enough research to know anything about this exactly...but I'm eager to do some reading

The last thing we need is "more services from the government." I'm sure this will ruffle some folks' feathers, but I believe "income inequality" is nothing more than a buzzword for socialists who would love to usurp and "redistribute" the wealth of this country "equally." Should this ever become the reality we live in in the US (and we are terrifyingly close to this already), I'm outta here.

Religions and Governments are the two biggest problems we have. Getting rid of religion and reining government in to its proper role will allow Capitalism to function properly. This will fix a great many things. Part of reining in the gov't will be to eliminate the crony capitalism that gives all business a negative connotation. Sorry, showing my Libertarian roots here.

That's a good point. It probably would be less religious if that were the case. Too many churches that will help you out with food and shelter but will have a catch like having you listen to a sermon or something. People who don't know better and need the help start to think that god is good. If the government did more to fill this role, perhaps more people wouldn't credit religion for helping them.

That all makes sense.