Survey: Religious Conversion and Self-Perceived Morality

[Feil]

Anybody who has spent much time amongst the strongly religious knows the story. My life was bad. I was morally loose. I lacked self control. I was a bad person. Then I was converted, and my life changed. Now I am a much better person, thanks to God. I'm interested in polling this board's members for their own experiences, since we have many members who are not presently members of the religions in which they were raised.

Were you converted (or to use a word that I think is a bit silly, 'deconverted')? I'm interested in knowing, in your own opinion, whether or not you are a significantly better person (as opposed to just more correct about religious matters or more likely to go to Heaven) as a result.

Although this is framed as a poll, posts are requested to specify, comment, and discuss.

[Knife]

I'm not sure what option to pick, probably the last one. I was raised by my maternal grandparents, one of which was a Mormon (though fairly lapsed) and the other a episcopalian (I think) that was non-practicing. Pretty much each one knew the religion of what their parents where and acknowledged it culturally but never really practiced it. My mom was more a hippy, neo-modern whatever, but still acknowledged her 'christian' roots.

I was never 'forced' into a religion by the family, though being in down town Mormon-vile, I had immense pressure by friends and neighbors to conform. My grandparents never baptized me either, thank Bajesus. I was fairly Agnostic, not really caring when I was young, more and more militant atheist as I get older. Never a 'conversion' moment I guess, more of a gradual awakening as I started to care more and more about the subject.

[General Zod]

I think conversion is a poor choice of words since it has very specific connotations associated with it. Though frankly I'd say I've developed stronger ethics since I stopped being concerned with magical sky pixies and started putting more thought into the impact of my own actions.

[Soontir C'boath]

I do not know how I fit. I remember as a kid wondering if not being a Christian was the reason why I was in a "poor" position in life while other kids who did seem to be more well off. I think I had a time when I became one but then it fell apart when nothing better happened.

[Feil]

I may be wrong (I often am!) but I think that conversion is the right word, here. First you were one thing, then you were something else. There may not be a defining day when you jumped up and said, "Glory hallelujah, I'm gonna be a [fill in the blank] now!" - there almost never is, in fact. But you can point at one time and say "here I was this" and at another time and say "here I was that". That is what most Christians refer to as conversion. I don't see why nonchristians ought not to use the same terminology.

(An agnostic with tribal connections to the dominant local religion but no personal faith would qualify as 'no religion' for the purpose of this poll.)

[General Zod]

I may be wrong (I often am!) but I think that conversion is the right word, here. First you were one thing, then you were something else. There may not be a defining day when you jumped up and said, "Glory hallelujah, I'm gonna be a [fill in the blank] now!" - there almost never is, in fact. But you can point at one time and say "here I was this" and at another time and say "here I was that". That is what most Christians refer to as conversion. I don't see why nonchristians ought not to use the same terminology.

(An agnostic with tribal connections to the dominant local religion but no personal faith would qualify as 'no religion' for the purpose of this poll.)

As far as I see it, conversion implies someone else specifically led you from point a to point b. As opposed to coming to a conclusion that point A was probably bullshit and leaving on your own.

[Broomstick]

Pardon me, I am going to get a little nitpicky but only because I think you're operating from a very Abrahamic viewpoint and wish to point a few things out you may not be aware of, or may not have thought of before.

Anybody who has spent much time amongst the strongly religious knows the story. My life was bad. I was morally loose. I lacked self control. I was a bad person. Then I was converted, and my life changed. Now I am a much better person, thanks to God.

Anecdote: I used to work at a place with a lot of Fundies. One of their recruitment strategies was to reassure me that no matter how bad I had been, no matter how bad a past action of mine was, I could still come to Jesus. This is when they weren't in a one-upmanship contest over who was the worst badass prior to their own conversions. After one such reassurance that thieves, rapists, murderers, etc. were welcome into the fold I batted my eyes with all the innocence I could munster and said "well, I've never done anything that bad, not even close. Is it required that I be that bad before converting? Because that's all you ever talk about, how bad you all were before you found Jesus..."

End of that strategy in recards to little old me.

Were you converted (or to use a word that I think is a bit silly, 'deconverted')?

No. I'm not sure my experience even fits anywhere in your poll.

I'm interested in knowing, in your own opinion, whether or not you are a significantly better person (as opposed to just more correct about religious matters or more likely to go to Heaven) as a result.

My religion is not dictated by some moldly old book or group of crotchety old men, so "correctness" is relative in my case. And we don't believe in heaven, at least not as conceptualized by the Christians or Muslims.

I may be wrong (I often am!) but I think that conversion is the right word, here. First you were one thing, then you were something else. There may not be a defining day when you jumped up and said, "Glory hallelujah, I'm gonna be a [fill in the blank] now!" - there almost never is, in fact. But you can point at one time and say "here I was this" and at another time and say "here I was that". That is what most Christians refer to as conversion. I don't see why nonchristians ought not to use the same terminology.

Because we're not Christians?

My crowd uses the term "initiation". And we insist on it being a long, thoughtful process. Spontaneous enthusiasm might get a person started but we don't expect it to last and it's certainly not a requirement.

Also, we insist on initiation being voluntary. As opposed to conversion, which can be coercive, or worse yet, baptism performed on someone too young to comprehend the ritural or give consent to it. The latter two are offensive to us.

That, and we don't really expect a person to change drastically upon initiation. In fact, we'd probably be suspicious if they did. We like to think we know who you are before we invite you in. Changing over time, sure, everyone does that, but ironically enough although there is room for "magic"* in the religion we don't think initiation magically makes you into something else which is something that, from my viewpoint, Christians and Muslims DO expect to happen when you convert.

* "Magic" is in quotes because it's a loaded term and within my religion it is used and defined somewhat differently than in the mainstream. Attempting to explain it would probably really derail the thread and that is not my intention.

[Dave]

I'm not sure how to answer this one. I converted from Christianity to atheism, but it was a long process, and of course there was no immediate change.

Over time, I have become more argumentative and at times disrespectful towards Christianity since then, as I almost detest the religion now, mostly because I feel I was misdirected and lied to. Partially as a result of living in a fraternity, my language has grown fouler and my jokes coarser.

However, I feel my critical thinking and reasoning skills have drastically improved, my sense of ethics has become based on reason rather than scripture, and I have grown more mature and gained wisdom.

Is it better? Is it worse? I'm not sure, but it certainly isn't 'distinct'.

[LionElJonson]

I personally went from "yeah, I'm a Christian because I was raised that way" to "I'm a Christian because I examined it mostly-rationally and decided that it was the optimal choice with a variant of Pascal's Wager."

[UnderAGreySky]

Like Dave, I went from being raised in one religion (Hinduism) to being an atheist, but gradually. My father (like his father before him) is an atheist too, but I never realised it as my mum is a Hindu and tried raising us that way. Well, to be fair, she made us say our prayers and do the occasional ritual and temple-visit but that's about it. Both sisters and I were taught critical thinking from a young age, and all three of us are now atheists.

Personally, the world begins to make much more sense when you know there is no evil puppetmaster doing random shit which is part of his plan. "Lets have an earthquake here and drop a building on these schoolkids" "Lets give this lady, who lost her husband when her kids were 4 and 2, breast cancer at 50 and kill her with excruciating pain". I could never reconcile such malevolence with an all-knowing, all-seeing, all-powerful god, so I concluded that shit just happens, life's unfair and there's no sky fairy.

It has sort of changed me for the better, I suspect. I now know that I can't expect any breaks in life, and it is not a zero-sum game. All that shit about "everything that happens, happens for the best" is patently not true - and the only way to live a happy life is to take what comes your way and MAKE it happen for the best.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I personally went from "yeah, I'm a Christian because I was raised that way" to "I'm a Christian because I examined it mostly-rationally and decided that it was the optimal choice with a variant of Pascal's Wager."

Really? One in which you consider the consequences of being wrong about all other religions? If you are wrong about hinduism after all and do not follow your Dharma, you may be reborn as a non-primate.

I went from being a self-loathing gay science loving christian to someone who as an atheist was happy with himself and not plagued by cognitive dissonance. Definitely a better more well adjusted person.

[Deebles]

I ditched religion (anglican christianity) at about age 9, courtesy partly of attending a series of Royal Institution Christmas Lectures held by a chap called Dawkins... and became briefly quite obsessed with deconverting other kids, which made me fairly obnoxious to be around at the time (that said, so are a lot of 9-year-olds). Long term, however, I think it's been good for me, because I've been able to examine both moral and scientific viewpoints on their own merits, not on how well they fit in with my preferred modern interpretation of ancient texts.

However, it's pretty much impossible to know if I'd have been happier, more/less successful, generous, compassionate, honest, etc. if I hadn't done that. I'd definitely have been someone pretty different...

[Rye]

I lost religion in primary school but my ethics have always been "pretty good" at all ages, and my bouts with extreme misery have been sporadic and unrelated, I think. I sometimes consider becoming religious when I'm depressed to give my life some meaning and purpose, and psychologically projected strength, but I can't bring myself to do it.

[Covenant]

I became a lot happier when I lost religion, but it didn't change my ethical framework. My ethics were what pushed me to borderline anyway, since I couldn't accept an interpretation of the Bible that was at-odds with ethics and human rights. So I slid further and further into a more metaphysical context away from literalism, before I was challenged to defend that, and decided to just drop the pretense entirely.

Losing religion just felt empowering because I no longer had to feel guilty for supporting those nasty immoral acts like gay rights or contraception, but I was already supporting them--just with a feeling of guilt.

[salm]

I never believed in a religious sense. I guess when i was a small kid and some grown up would say something about god i might have believed it but more in the way that kids believe in Santa Clause and similar nonsense. In school we had religion and i allways assumed that people were just pretending to believe in all that stuff.

[Werrf]

I don't think it really counts as a conversion/deconversion, but I was raised more or less with the assumption that Christianity was real. Nobody really cared enough to argue one way or the other, it was just quietly assumed in the background. My parents never really said anything one way or the other, most of the assuming was done by my school. When I grew old enough to start properly understanding science lessons and the science books I was reading - probably eight or nine years old? - I more or less decided "you know what? This makes a whole lot more sense than all that God stuff", and that was that. I spent most of the rest of my childhood and most of my teenage years assuming that religion was something most people grew out of these days, though some old folks probably still held onto it because they were old and didn't want to change their minds (I was a kid, okay?)

I still remember the first time religion started to become a noticeable force in my world again, rather than a quaint, old-fashioned remnant. I was reading The Nitpicker's Guide for Next Generation Trekkers, and one of the nits picked about an episode was where Picard tells a race of proto-Vulcans that logic and rationality was the way to go, rather than believing in gods. The nit pointed out that 80% of Americans believed in some kind of god (I think that was the statistic), and therefore that Picard had called 80% of their audience dolts. This was somewhat of a revelation to me - I couldn't believe so many people still believed in sky pixies.

I don't think it's ever really affected my ethics or morality, beyond not feeling guilty about porn. I think, if anything, it's made me considerably more moral, and willing to question ideas I had held as true.

[Feil]

Broomstick, you raise a good point about coercive or childhood conversions. I don't think those would count for the sort of information I'm looking for, but I'm not sure.

General Zod, your point about conversion having the implication of somebody converting you is also a very good point. It's obviously too late for me to edit my OP, but I think now that change religions or lose/gain religion or another neutral phrase would be a much better (although somewhat unwieldy!) term to use. If you could recommend a more succinct word or phrase for future use, I'd be grateful.

Broomstick, I think that goes along with something implied in your statement about 'we are not christians.' My vocabulary and thought processes still use the language of Christianity in many areas, even though I've been a nonbeliever for years. I suppose it might be some sort of intellectual blind spot for me.

As for me, I fall into category 3. I moved from Christianity to Atheism - in lurches and gradual shifts, certainly - there really is almost never a clean break. Along the way, I ditched conservative Christianity's disgusting stance on gay marriage, an inability to truly love and appreciate people of contrary religions, and all the mental hypocrisy and doublethink that came along with the package.

[Junghalli]

Really? One in which you consider the consequences of being wrong about all other religions? If you are wrong about hinduism after all and do not follow your Dharma, you may be reborn as a non-primate.

Oh it gets better. There are an infinite number of potentially imaginable religions, including an infinite number that claim that the result of not believing in them is being sent to Hell. How can you be sure that the true religion isn't, say, the one practiced on a part of a single isolated volcanic island on a planet in the M101 galaxy and you'll go to Hell for not believing in that?

[Formless]

Well, I was never what you would call a biblical literalist and always was more faithful to the edicts of science than the words of the Pope (I was raised Catholic). I would say that since I gave up on faith stopped deceiving myself my moral intuitions have improved. However, that may have more to do with the fact that I've gotten more interested in philosophy and ethics in general than because christian morality was dragging me down in a significant way.

Really? One in which you consider the consequences of being wrong about all other religions? If you are wrong about hinduism after all and do not follow your Dharma, you may be reborn as a non-primate.

Oh it gets better. There are an infinite number of potentially imaginable religions, including an infinite number that claim that the result of not believing in them is being sent to Hell. How can you be sure that the true religion isn't, say, the one practiced on a part of a single isolated volcanic island on a planet in the M101 galaxy and you'll go to Hell for not believing in that?

And there is also all the possible permutations of solipsism and Plato's Cave to factor in. What odds do you put on this world being The Matrix? Or a very, very lucid dream?

Heck, what if God just wants people to leave him alone, and considers prayer and worship to be a nuisance akin to getting spam in your inbox? You never know-- you could end up in Hell anyway, because he really couldn't care less about humanity let alone understand the concerns of mortal minds like us. Maybe he's just an ordinary movie director whose film took on a life of its own; from his perspective we're just a work of fiction and he's right now trying to reconcile his own faith in a supernatural deity with a rational worldview (the Invisible Pink Unicorn is in vogue in universe E757b I hear). Or what if God is actually somewhere on Earth right at this moment-- but he doesn't know who he is, where he came from, or anything else about his life and identity? Maybe Jesus is that guy down the street that everyone thinks is off his medication. He could even be reading this right now, lurking SDN because he's been laid off at his job; and when he finally snaps out of his fugue he'll remember this conversation and promptly smite all the idiots of the world, starting with all the idiots who buy into Pascals Wager.

We can go pretty damn far down the rabbit hole once we start contemplating the unknown and the unknowable.

On a more personal note, how do you think God will react when he figures out that your belief was nothing but a farce, done out of convenience and a selfish lust for the fruits of heaven? Which, by the way, He almost certainly will figure out if he's half the deity the Bible claims he is. I mean, I never paid much attention in church before I gave up on the franchise, but I did get the impression that Jehova (and more so Jesus) wants people to genuinely love him and believe in him out of love and faith, not because they're shitting their pants over how hot the flames of Hell must be. Granted, he's not exactly portrayed as the sharpest knife in the drawer... but you get the idea. The implications of this argument are such that there are a lot of religious people who don't buy it.

Hands down, Pascals Wager has got to be THE most bankrupt argument in favor of belief in god. There really isn't any other way to put it.

P.S. LionElJonson? Protip: the OP asked us whether or not we think our choice to believe/not believe made us better people, not what argument led us to that belief. So your comment isn't even on subject.

[adam_grif]

Went Christianity -> Irreligious Agnostic Atheism, am basically the same person as I was before. Therefore, I voted the NO option for leaving Christianity.

[Broomstick]

Broomstick, I think that goes along with something implied in your statement about 'we are not christians.' My vocabulary and thought processes still use the language of Christianity in many areas, even though I've been a nonbeliever for years. I suppose it might be some sort of intellectual blind spot for me.

More like a blind spot for those growing up in societies where Christians are the overwhelming majority. The Christian viewpoint becomes the default for almost everyone, and there is the tendency to want to shoe horn non-Abrahamic religions into a Christian mold of sorts.

Unless you seriously study other non-Abrahamic religions, or go through a period of belonging to one and really absorbing the culture, it's quite hard to break out of the mindset imposed when you were a child.

Still, it does have it's funny moments.... I had a quite devout Catholic aunt who used to have this HUGE cross in her bedroom, one of the really graphic ones with the agonized Christ and blood and everything. As a very young child, perhaps as old as six but probably younger we were visiting her and for whatever reason I ran into her bedroom. Right into this HUGE, GORY CRUCIFIXION that was almost as big as I was. OK, here's the little non-Christian who just ran in Aunt's bedroom to find a man nailed to the wall and bleeding.

Well of course I screamed. Really, really loud. There is this person who is NAILED TO THE WALL AND BLEEDING!!!!

Aunt didn't get it. Didn't get it at all. Her cross was a dear object to her, an object of veneration and... well, I didn't and still don't get her viewpoint. What she found a wonderful expression of faith I found to be a horrible image of butchery. I sometimes think I "got" the horrible part of the crucifixion much better than most Christians do. And she worshiped that? ::::shudder::::

I have since told that story to a lot of people, and while most of them get the point there is a definitely a small subset of Christians who just can't comprehend why their representation of god can send a small child into hysterics. In fact, I have on a couple occasions run into people who were offended at the notion a six year old could have such a negative reaction to Jesus. It just goes to show you how entrenched the mindset gets.

I confess, though, that some of my distaste for Christianity does stem from that traumatic memory. And I do feel quite uncomfortable around crosses that are more than an abstract symbol but rather have the gory writhing Jesus. It's just.... horrifying. Icky. How people can sit in front of one of those every week and sing of love and joy I just don't understand.

On another occasion, when I was living in a college dorm, one of the girls professed that she was a Buddhist, having been raised as such in her native Vietnam. One of the other girls blurted out "You really believe that nonsense? How can you not believe in Jesus?" Mindset again, and early programming.

Those are extreme examples, of course, but one of the difficulties I have in discussing my religion with Christians is that they don't have a common language with me. I know their terminology - I can't escape it, living where I do - but they don't know mine, and often have no interest in learning it. Nor did I convert from some form of Christianity to it, I have never been Christian. Another fun thing are people who are either shocked or disbelieving that I've never been baptized. Ah, fun times...!

[Bottlestein]

On another occasion, when I was living in a college dorm, one of the girls professed that she was a Buddhist, having been raised as such in her native Vietnam. One of the other girls blurted out "You really believe that nonsense? How can you not believe in Jesus?" Mindset again, and early programming.

Buddhism is quite different from most other religions - some people even say it's in a unique class of "religious philosophy". I know a few of people who are Hindu or of the Syrian Orthodox Church of Christ, but also pray to Bodhisattva. I know some people who are Buddhist - from Tamil Nadu (India), Cambodia, and Japan, who insist that praying to any form of the Buddha is completely missing the point of Buddhism.

[General Zod]

On another occasion, when I was living in a college dorm, one of the girls professed that she was a Buddhist, having been raised as such in her native Vietnam. One of the other girls blurted out "You really believe that nonsense? How can you not believe in Jesus?" Mindset again, and early programming.

Buddhism is quite different from most other religions - some people even say it's in a unique class of "religious philosophy". I know a few of people who are Hindu or of the Syrian Orthodox Church of Christ, but also pray to Bodhisattva. I know some people who are Buddhist - from Tamil Nadu (India), Cambodia, and Japan, who insist that praying to any form of the Buddha is completely missing the point of Buddhism.

Buddhism has just as many factions as Christianity. Some Buddhists pray to deities, some don't. Some Christians pray to saints, some don't. Etc.

[Broomstick]

On another occasion, when I was living in a college dorm, one of the girls professed that she was a Buddhist, having been raised as such in her native Vietnam. One of the other girls blurted out "You really believe that nonsense? How can you not believe in Jesus?" Mindset again, and early programming.

Buddhism is quite different from most other religions - some people even say it's in a unique class of "religious philosophy". I know a few of people who are Hindu or of the Syrian Orthodox Church of Christ, but also pray to Bodhisattva. I know some people who are Buddhist - from Tamil Nadu (India), Cambodia, and Japan, who insist that praying to any form of the Buddha is completely missing the point of Buddhism.

Actually, if you go back and re-read my post NOWHERE do I state the Vietnamese girl was praying to Buddha. Or anything else. That is YOUR assumption which once again brings home my point about early conditioning. When you say "religion" in the west most people assume there is praying to something going on - though as you point out, there are forms of Buddhism that not only do not require prayer but actually discourage it.

[Simon_Jester]

Umm... I don't think he was making an adversarial statement, Broomstick. Just commenting on how "weird" Buddhism is, compared to the mental model most people (not just in "the West," but also in Africa and the Middle East, and in much of India) have of religions as being deity-centric systems.

So I think you're being just a tad to quick to bite his head off when he says things like "I know some people who are Buddhist... who insist that praying to any form of the Buddha is completely missing the point of Buddhism."