Subscription: $15 / year

Membership: $15/year

All correspondence to:

Editor: Duane Bates

All correspondence to:

P. O. Box 1744

Greenville, SC 29602

 

 

January, 2009

The Voice of Sanity

THE NEWSLETTER OF THE UPSTATE S.C. SECULAR HUMANISTS

                 Visit our web-site for current and back-issues at: www.uscsh.org

                                      e-mail:  secularhmnst@aol.com   

Americans' Confidence in Religion Waning, Poll Finds

By Audrey Barrick

Christian Post Reporter

Fri, Dec. 26 2008 11:29 AM EST

Just three years ago, half of the U.S. adult population felt the influence of religion on American life was rising. Today, only a little more than a quarter believe so. A recent Gallup Poll found that just 27 percent of Americans perceive religion's influence to be on the upswing while 67 percent of Americans say religion as a whole is losing influence on American life.

The trend is consistent with those who attend religious services regularly as well as those who seldom or never attend services, with majorities saying religion is losing influence in this country. Since 2005, the Gallup Poll has recorded a downward trend in those who believe the influence of religion is increasing. The record low for this perception was in 1970 when only 14 percent said religion was increasing in influence at that time.

The last time a majority of Americans felt the influence of religion was rising was in December 2001, just months after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, when 71 percent said religious influence was increasing – the highest percentage Gallup Poll recorded since 1957. Previous polls show that there was a long period of doubt about the influence of religion during the Vietnam War era – from 1965 through 1975, according to the Gallup report. Then, in the 1980s, religious influence was perceived as growing when religious conservatism, or the "religious right," was gaining prominence during the Ronald Reagan presidency.

The Gallup Poll suggests that the recent waning perception that religion is increasing in influence is "partially a result of the decline of Republican political strength throughout President George W. Bush's second term. At the close of 2008, few Americans perceive that religion is thriving in U.S. society, and a relatively small majority believe religion is relevant to solving today's problems," the report stated. "These perceptions may stem in part from the political climate – characterized by a weakened Republican Party and the incoming Democratic administration – as well as from the overwhelming consensus that the main problems facing the country today are economic."

In other major findings, the percentage of Americans who believe that religion can answer society's problems is at an all-time low, with only 53 percent saying religion "can answer all or most of today's problems."The poll, conducted Dec. 4-7, comes during an economic crisis and at a time when the vast majority of Americans believe the U.S. economy is the nation's greatest challenge.

Meanwhile, over the last several decades, the percentage of those who perceive religion as "largely old-fashioned and out of date" has been on a continuous rise. The latest poll found that 28 percent believe it's old-fashioned. Among Americans who attend worship services weekly, 82 percent say religion can answer today's problems. Only 27 percent of those who rarely or never attend agreed. Also, Americans across all age groups were more likely to say that religion can answer today's problems than reject it as old-fashioned. But the poll found that confidence in religion to solve problems increased with age (44 percent of 18- to 34-year-olds believe religion can answer problems compared to 52 percent of those 35 to 54 years old and 60 percent of those 55 years and older).

Despite the decreasing confidence in religion among Americans, a majority still says religion plays a very important role in their own lives and self-reported church attendance has not declined this year, the Gallup Poll noted. Results of the latest poll are based on interviews with 1,009 national adults, aged 18 and older.

SUBMISSION BY MEMBER ROGER B. ROLLIN

Editor

The Greenville News

 

Ho! Ho! Ho!  Isn't Dr. Bob Jones III just brimming with the holiday spirit?  His Guest Column, "God offers love to all--even humanists" (12/6/08), exudes good will toward men, even that dastardly humanist Mike Cubelo and his non-theistic ilk (like me).  Using old tricks like guilt by association and ad hominem argument, Jones lumps people like us with murderers and rapists while also suggesting that we are blind and full of vanity, sinful, inhuman, and greedy. And Merry Christmas to you too, Dr. Bob!

 

Upon what does BJU's chancellor base such allegations? Surely not upon his personal acquaintance with Cubelo, whom I've known for years and who is a thoroughly kind and decent human being. No, Jones's diatribe is grounded in his reading of the Bible. He of course believes this collection to be the inerrant word of God, as do millions of Christians. Other millions believe it to be no such thing.

 

Jones refers to various discoveries of modern science, but according to Biblical "science" the earth is only about 10,000 years old, the sun revolves around it, and nature and human life were created in a matter of days rather than evolved over time, as modern science has shown. His Bible also, by the way, insists that people like Cubelo and me be put to death for our thinking (Deuteronomy 13:5).

 

Humanism offers a kinder, gentler world-view, one that is both sweetly reasonable and liberating. Check it out in such magazines as The Humanist and Free Inquiry. (The latter always prints a statement of humanist principles inside its cover page.) There you will find, if not faith, certainly hope, and certainly charity.

 

OPEN LETTER TO GOVERNOR SANFORD

PUBLISHED IN GREENVILLE NEWS

BY DUANE BATES

 

I am responding to your request for feedback on the your proposed changes to our tax system that includes eliminating the corporate income tax and changing the personal income tax to allow taxpayers to choose between a flat 3.5% rate without deductions or the current tax schedule.

 

In the 2006-07 fiscal year the corporation tax generated $262 million of the $6.2 billion in General Fund Revenues, about 4% of the total.  Since 83% of General Fund Expenditures are spend for education, health, corrections and public safety, are you proposing to cut spending on these important functions or find additional sources of revenue to replace the lost corporation tax revenue?  I note that the corporations deducted $675 million in various tax credits to arrive at their fiscal 2006-07 net tax liability of $262 million and carried forward another $627 million in credits to future years.

 

 As a retired financial manager and one-time small business owner, and I want to see a complete financial projection on the future impact on both revenues and expenditures of any proposed changes in the tax structure.  We cannot rest our states’ economic future on a claim that changes in the way we collect taxes will “grow the economy”. These projections will also allow us to hold our elected officials accountable for implementing any tax system changes in a manner that will accomplish the stated goals.

 

I suggest you ask the Department of Revenue to prepare a computer program that would examine every tax return in the states’ database to evaluate the effects of your proposed tax changes on personal income tax collections.   This program should assume that each taxpayer would make the rational choice of choosing the filing method that would produce the lowest tax liability, giving us a good estimate of if, in aggregate, total personal income tax collections would increase or decrease.  Personal income taxes currently generate approximately 47% of all General Fund Revenues, with sales tax collections contributing another 42%, so any proposed changes to personal income taxes or sales taxes need to be carefully evaluated.

 

I fully support the conclusion of the Palmetto Institute that our entire tax system needs to be revised to recognize the global economic environment.  Two critical areas that need to be addressed are our investments in education at all levels and the low per capita income.  Based on an analysis of all SC income tax returns, the average income per tax return has increased from $21,614 in 2001 to $25,413 in 2006, an increase of 17.6%.  However, an examination of the distribution of incomes for the same period shows that the highest SC tax level, annual taxable income of $750,000 or more, had an average increase in income per tax return of $264,561 between 2001 and 2006. By contrast, all SC taxable incomes from zero to $15,000, 60% of all returns, had an average increase in income per tax return of only $159 in the same six-year period.

 

We need to continue to invest in early childhood education, increase the quality of our educational system, substantially improve high school graduations rates, and encourage and support affordable higher education. The single most important indicator of future earnings is the number of years of education.  If South Carolina is to compete in the national and international economic arena, we need a more educated workforce.

 

South Carolina and the rest of our nation are currently facing a recession of unknown depth and length.  Unemployment tax payments are a very important part of our social support network in good economic periods and a critical need during economic downturns. Given the circumstances and timing, your decision to make the application for a Federal loan to maintain unemployment payments contingent on the Employment Security Commission’s providing the Commence Department with specific data was inappropriate. Our state should have acted responsibly by maintaining the recommended one-year, recession level cushion of funds to pay unemployment benefits even if it required raising rates or contribution levels.

 

Finally, while your goal of improving the competitive position of South Carolina in attracting new businesses is admirable, it should not be accomplished by holding down the already lagging incomes of the majority of our citizens.  It is time for you and the Legislature to put your personal and institutional agendas aside and join with the Palmetto Foundation and similar organizations to create a South Carolina economy for the twenty-first century where all our citizens will have a real opportunity to improve their incomes and lives.

 

CDC ISSUES NEW REPORT ON TEEN BIRTH RATES

 

The Center for Disease Control (CDC) has released a new report on births to teenage births that shows a significant increase in twenty-six states, with Mississippi, Texas and New Mexico having the highest levels and the New England states the lowest. A link to the full article is posted below. Here is key quote from the article:

 

Mississippi’s rate was more than 60 percent higher than the national average in 2006, according to new state statistics released Wednesday by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The teen birth rate for that year in Texas and New Mexico was more than 50 percent higher.

 

The three states have large proportions of black and Hispanic teenagers — groups that traditionally have higher birth rates, experts noted. The lowest teen birth rates continue to be in New England, where three states have rates at roughly half the national average, which is 42 births per 1,000 teen women.

 

Here are some of the teen birth rates by state, high to low

 

Mississippi                               68

New Mexico                            64

Texas                                       63

Georgia                                   54

Tennessee                                54

South Carolina                     53

North Carolina             50

Connecticut                              24

Massachusetts                          21

Vermont                                   21

New Hampshire                    19

 

As a person who worked on the frontlines of the efforts to reduce births to single teens, and the father of two daughters, I know that this is a very complex issue for which there is no simple answer. Cultural, religious, medical, educational, economic, social, and several other, factors influence the decision teens make to engage in unprotected sex, but we know that the more factual and complete information about the risks, both near and long-term, that teens have about pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, the lower the rate of teenage births. At the bottom of the teenage births problem are ignorance, a lack of a long-term view of a positive future and parent’s inability, or unwillingness, to supervise their kids and inculcate positive self-esteem values by modeling rational and common sense behaviors.

 

The proof that “abstinence only” approach to sex education has failed is clear; regardless of the fact the outgoing Bush administration has recently poured more millions into this failed program.  We need to recognize the right of teens to receive vital, and sometimes life-saving and certainly life improving, information relating to human sexuality.

 

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28538524/?GT1=43001

 

 

 

 

MEETING SCHEDULE

 

February Brunch: The February brunch will be held on Saturday, February14th at 10:30AM at Denny’s Restaurant, 2521 Wade Hampton Blvd., Greenville.  Call Duane Bates at 423-0802 for directions and more information.

 

 

FEBRUARY MONTHLY MEETING:  The February monthly meeting will on Sunday, February 22nd, at 5 PM when Lee Deitz will host the annual “Chili Night” at his home at 21 Walnut Street, Greenville. Call Lee at  (864) 233-0905 or via email leeingvl@aol.com to coordinate your contribution.