The Ugly Canada Thread

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Go the other direction. Just ban religion altogether. It creates a dozen or more brainwashed loons for every person it actually helps.

Fat chance.

If that's your wish I think you are going to be very disappointed by the next couple of decades.

The presence of religion in Canada is likely to become more visible, not less.

I know people point to the growing number of Canadians who say they have no religion, but many signs point to that demographic plateauing fairly soon.

It was virtually unthinkable not that long ago, but we may even see a resurgence of traditional Christian religions, perhaps as a "me too" response to the growth, visibility and influence of non-Christian religions.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Fat chance.

If that's your wish I think you are going to be very disappointed by the next couple of decades.

The presence of religion in Canada is likely to become more visible, not less.

I know people point to the growing number of Canadians who say they have no religion, but many signs point to that demographic plateauing fairly soon.

It was virtually unthinkable not that long ago, but we may even see a resurgence of traditional Christian religions, perhaps as a "me too" response to the growth, visibility and influence of non-Christian religions.

I think that's unlikely, but my impression is that evangelical sects are booming among young suburban families and that the Church of Rome has been goosed in recent years, at least in those parishes with large numbers of Filipino immigrants.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

I think that's unlikely, but my impression is that evangelical sects are booming among young suburban families and that the Church of Rome has been goosed in recent years, at least in those parishes with large numbers of Filipino immigrants.

My kids are my barometer or my canary in the coal mine. They definitely have a heightened sense of religious consciousness compared to what my wife and I had growing up. This is due to the presence of schoolmates and also friends who are of many different religions and also levels of devoutness.

When all your friends say "I'm religion X, I'm religion X too, I'm religion Y, I'm religion Z", there is at least some amount peer pressure to identify with a religion. Sure some of the stronger-willed kids will say "I am atheist, God is make-believe". Or something like that. Maybe a bit more respectfully, depending on the kid.

My kids haven't been taught to be atheist and they haven't been taught to be very religious either. But they have Catholicism all around them in an accessory way due to extended family, grand-parents, etc.

I am pretty sure they answer "Roman Catholic" if their friends ask them what their religion is.

Don't underestimate the long-term effects of this phenomenon.

[FFX-ME]

I think the demographic shift towards irreligiousity will continue but will definitely slow down but only since religious families tend to have more children and many of the immigrants are in fact very religious.

[kool maudit]

Religion is belief. How can you ban belief? Either you think something is real or you do not. No institution can change what anyone thinks about the true nature of the world.

History is filled, of course, with institutions that have sought to prevent us from saying what we think the nature of the world is, and that have tried to force us to pretend we think that it is whatever they say it is.

These deserve every bit of the violence they inevitably face.

[kool maudit]

In my view we are more likely between religions than past it.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

In my view we are more likely between religions than past it.

I agree and also admit to being very afraid of what the new beast will look like.

My spidey-sense tells me I may end up nostalgic for the relatively-benign Roman Catholicism of my youth.

[FFX-ME]

We should bring back Norse religions. Praise be to Odin!

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I agree and also admit to being very afraid of what the new beast will look like.

My spidey-sense tells me I may end up nostalgic for the relatively-benign Roman Catholicism of my youth.

I'm Catholic and I think I have some insight to offer here. To your point, one thing I've noticed in recent years is a trend toward a more orthodox form of Catholicism which seems to be most popular among young white people. Most every city will now have at least a couple of churches offering Latin masses, and the people in the congregation tend to be younger (in the 18-40 range) and approach it with a fairly rigid formality.

It's interesting that at the Sunday night "folk masses" which were initially created in the post-Vatican II era to appeal to younger people with a hippie-ish sensbility, you probably see more grey-haired people playing instruments than anything. (At least in my neck of the woods that's how it is.) Yet at the same time, the number of young people getting up and putting on suits and dresses for 8:30 am Latin Mass is definitely on the upswing.

It's an interesting phenomenon and it gives some credence to kool m.'s comment that the next counterculture is coming from the right.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by esquire

I'm Catholic and I think I have some insight to offer here. To your point, one thing I've noticed in recent years is a trend toward a more orthodox form of Catholicism which seems to be most popular among young white people. Most every city will now have at least a couple of churches offering Latin masses, and the people in the congregation tend to be younger (in the 18-40 range) and approach it with a fairly rigid formality.

It's interesting that at the Sunday night "folk masses" which were initially created in the post-Vatican II era to appeal to younger people with a hippie-ish sensbility, you probably see more grey-haired people playing instruments than anything. (At least in my neck of the woods that's how it is.) Yet at the same time, the number of young people getting up and putting on suits and dresses for 8:30 am Latin Mass is definitely on the upswing.

It's an interesting phenomenon and it gives some credence to kool m.'s comment that the next counterculture is coming from the right.

I LOL'ed at the hippie masses as I know exactly what you're talking about! I guess all those people who went to hippie masses in their youth are still going but have all gotten old!

Quebec being Quebec, the new youth movement is only a teeny tiny blip here, as the Catholic church is only barely recovering from the knockout punches it took in the 60s, 70s and 80s.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

I think the demographic shift towards irreligiousity will continue but will definitely slow down but only since religious families tend to have more children and many of the immigrants are in fact very religious.

In the best case scenario we might end up with two blocks: a large irreligious population on the one side, and another segment of the populace that is religious on the other, with the difference that the religious block will be considerably more devout than it is at the moment.

Right now the two thirds to three quarters of Canadians who report a religious affiliation are very predominantly people like my parents and my in-laws. They are moderately Cafeteria Catholic, and these "Cafeteria" types exist in other older Christian religions as well, and to some degree even in the Jewish community.

Without getting into too much detail, one of the main characteristics of these types of people is that they don't think that wider society should reflect their religion's beliefs. They have a high level of acceptance for a pretty secular society and institutions.

Most of these people are older, and what is happening in the generations younger than them is a split between those who abandon religion altogether (boosting the irreligious demographic) and those who are left in the religious category (increasingly dominated by true believers as all the softies have left the ship).

Add to this the fact that immigrants to Canada (with the exception of those from the Far East of mainland Asia) tend to be more religious than native-born Canadians, and you have a little armchair Acajack futuristic theory served up just for you!

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

Religion is belief. How can you ban belief? Either you think something is real or you do not. No institution can change what anyone thinks about the true nature of the world.

History is filled, of course, with institutions that have sought to prevent us from saying what we think the nature of the world is, and that have tried to force us to pretend we think that it is whatever they say it is.

These deserve every bit of the violence they inevitably face.

Could not have put it better. Not sure how anyone could consider banning religion as helpful or any better than an autocratic regime.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

Religion is belief. How can you ban belief? Either you think something is real or you do not. No institution can change what anyone thinks about the true nature of the world.

History is filled, of course, with institutions that have sought to prevent us from saying what we think the nature of the world is, and that have tried to force us to pretend we think that it is whatever they say it is.

These deserve every bit of the violence they inevitably face.

Brainwashing should be a clear indication that my light hearted post is referencing the latter. More extreme discriminatory groups have been banned to the point of being pushed to the shadows. Maybe one day ...

People are shocked by Trump's campaign or that racism is still as strong as it ever was in the US. Should it be such a surprise when politics are so deeply rooted in discriminatory religion?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Brainwashing should be a clear indication that my light hearted post is referencing the latter. More extreme discriminatory groups have been banned to the point of being pushed to the shadows. Maybe one day ...

People are shocked by Trump's campaign or that racism is still as strong as it ever was in the US. Should it be such a surprise when politics are so deeply rooted in discriminatory religion?

I don't deny it's a factor among many but I am puzzled as to how religion could be that big a determining factor in American racial politics.

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

Religion is belief. How can you ban belief? Either you think something is real or you do not. No institution can change what anyone thinks about the true nature of the world.

History is filled, of course, with institutions that have sought to prevent us from saying what we think the nature of the world is, and that have tried to force us to pretend we think that it is whatever they say it is.

These deserve every bit of the violence they inevitably face.

More accurately, I think you mean it's never ideal for institutions to coerce how people should think. Because lots of institutions have done that very effectively.

Roman legions with their attendant missionaries, the bloody march of Islam across the Middle East beginning in the 7th century, Communism in the 20th century, etc. were all extremely effective in changing how people think about the world.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Fat chance.

If that's your wish I think you are going to be very disappointed by the next couple of decades.

The presence of religion in Canada is likely to become more visible, not less.

I know people point to the growing number of Canadians who say they have no religion, but many signs point to that demographic plateauing fairly soon.

I don't see any reason why that would happen in the near future. Generally, once people are irreligious they don't "go back". And unless the amount of religious immigrants were to substantially increase beyond the rate at which people are abandoning their faiths then that's unlikely to happen.

There could come a point when religious adherence bottoms out as has happened in some very secular western European nations, whereby they've seen a slight uptick in their populations of religious adherents (mostly Muslim) due to immigration, but given time these groups will most likely become more secular as others have before them.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

I don't see any reason why that would happen in the near future. Generally, once people are irreligious they don't "go back". And unless the amount of religious immigrants were to substantially increase beyond the rate at which people are abandoning their faiths then that's unlikely to happen.

There could come a point when religious adherence bottoms out as has happened in some very secular western European nations, whereby they've seen a slight uptick in their populations of religious adherents (mostly Muslim) due to immigration, but given time these groups will most likely become more secular as others have before them.

I don't know how we can make such a statement about irreligion as a point of no return as it's still a fairly recent historical phenomenon.

Also, the evolution of much of the Middle East over the past 30-40 years goes against this theory. Even if in some cases it wasn't total irreligion that was the starting point, certainly a lot of people who were at the very least lapsed or extremely moderate in the 70s and 80s have children and grandchildren today who are fairly orthodox religiously there.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I don't know how we can make such a statement about irreligion as a point of no return as it's still a fairly recent historical phenomenon.

Also, the evolution of much of the Middle East over the past 30-40 years goes against this theory. Even if in some cases it wasn't total irreligion that was the starting point, certainly a lot of people who were at the very least lapsed or extremely moderate in the 70s and 80s have children and grandchildren today who are fairly orthodox religiously there.

Well, just anecdotally, how many people do you know who were non-religious who became religious later in life, compared to the opposite? Religious adherence relies quite heavily on the fact that most people are simply born into it and carry on either as force of habit or because that is how their worldview has been shaped - or alternatively, some sort of trauma or life-altering experience that pushes one into finding comfort in it. And the former is gradually declining, while the latter simply isn't common enough to have much of a demographic impact.

Of course it could happen, but I don't think the Middle East is much of a bellweather for what will happen in the West or elsewhere in the world.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Well, just anecdotally, how many people do you know who were non-religious who became religious later in life, compared to the opposite? Religious adherence relies quite heavily on the fact that most people are simply born into it and carry on either as force of habit or because that is how their worldview has been shaped - or alternatively, some sort of trauma or life-altering experience that pushes one into finding comfort in it. And the former is gradually declining, while the latter simply isn't common enough to have much of a demographic impact.

Of course it could happen, but I don't think the Middle East is much of a bellweather for what will happen in the West or elsewhere in the world.

That begs an interesting question: is the West become more like the Middle East or is the Middle East becoming more like the West? (Assuming we have to choose one answer or the other.)

[O-tacular]

Has anyone been following the Rise of Right Wing Nativism thread? That thing and mistercorporate belong in here in the worst way.