Poor, Ignorant and Easily Led

Some years back, the Washington Post editorial board apologized for an editorial calling evangelical Christians “poor, ignorant, and easily led.” Good thing, too.

Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Mollie Ziegler Hemingway reports:

From Hollywood to the academy, nonbelievers are convinced that a decline in traditional religious belief would lead to a smarter, more scientifically literate and even more civilized populace.

The reality is that the New Atheist campaign, by discouraging religion, won’t create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass superstition. And that’s not a conclusion to take on faith–it’s what the empirical data tell us.

“What Americans Really Believe,” a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience than evangelical Christians.

It is not the case, however, that all new atheists and liberal Protestants are “poor, ignorant, and easily led." Reminds of the words of two prominent politicos (Obama and Marx (a new, new apology for Marx)), and by extension their supporters.