116
Does it seem like religious people are less animal friendly? (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 3 weeks ago by to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world
112 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I have been noting this more recently and it seems to be a trend, at least with people I converse with on the regular. The really religious types aren't animal people or downright dont like them. The more chill or agnostic types seem to be more apt to love animals.

I could go on my theory of this but I'm interested to see if anyone thinks this is a trend.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 20 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (10 children)

that also seems anecdotal... I personally never heard of a single one (oh, anecdotal too) and in all cities I've lived I knew of shelters and rescuers because I'm one (and I currently take care of 34 cats and 4 dogs), and I must agree with OP, I know a lot of rescuers that have a religion (like, that vague belief in the god their parents talked about) but none that are overtly religious (wear symbols, attend temples, etc)

edit: Homeless shelters and nursing homes though, plenty of religious institutions behind them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (9 children)

    Ton are a google search away. Dalo Acres Animal Sanctuary UT, St. Francis Animal Sanctuary MI, Keeping the Faith Animal Shelter PA. There's a ton of em.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (8 children)

    The question isn't whether they are not animal friendly, but whether they are less animal friendly. There may be a ton of them but if there are six tons of non-religious shelters, there's a difference.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 weeks ago (7 children)

    What metric would you want to see?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (6 children)

    Self-reported religiosity and affection for animals would be a start.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago* (5 children)

    So the shelters and sanctuaries I listed as brief examples?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (4 children)

    No, the logic doesn't hold. There being shelters run by religious people does not say anything about whether they are more or less caring for animals than normal.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago* (3 children)

    So you would need X amount of religious people to make a post like "hey I'm x religion and I love animals" what's the number you'd need? Would it need to correlate proportionally to secular animal lovers?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    You'd want to show a significant negative correlation between religiosity and friendliness toward animals. 'Secular' would just be one end of the religiosity dimension.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Secular just means not religious, we are comparing the religious with the not religious. How religious an individual is, is way way too subjective to hold any weight at all. Comparing different religions/sects could bring interesting results.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago

    Yes, the religiosity dimension has secular at one end and religious at the other. You want to establish whether that dimension is aligned with friendliness to animals. How religious people are is measured all the time, but of course methods can be questioned. I agree that would be interesting; surely a religion's views on animals would have some affect on its adherents.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent