49

According to a post by latimes.com, "How secular family values stack up":

Atheists were almost absent from our prison population as of the late 1990s, comprising less than half of 1% of those behind bars, according to Federal Bureau of Prisons statistics. This echoes what the criminology field has documented for more than a century — the unaffiliated and the nonreligious engage in far fewer crimes.

Has the criminology field indeed documented the statistics (or other source of fact) that indicate that unaffiliated and nonreligious people engage in far fewer crimes?

If so, according to authority, what is meant by "far fewer"? And "crime"? (All crime? Violent crime?)

George Chalhoub
  • 30,246
  • 14
  • 129
  • 136
Brian M. Hunt
  • 17,999
  • 13
  • 99
  • 176
  • 36
    It had been noted before that professing a religion may be strategic before parole boards and the like, exaggerating any effect. – Oddthinking Feb 14 '15 at 03:15
  • 13
    Are you asking about correllation or causation? On top of @Oddthinking's point, MOST crimes in USA are committed by a very slim demographics, usually of lower income; and there's a definite correllation between atheism and higher income. Which would make atheists less likely to commit crimes for reasons having nothing to do with religion. – user5341 Feb 14 '15 at 18:50
  • 1
    @DVK: I think to support that slim demographic claim, you'd have to make a distinction between commiting 'crimes' (defined as anything the government has chosen to make illegal), and the chances a particular person might be arrested, convicted and imprisoned. That's also why 'crime' in the US is not commeasurable with 'crime' in the USSR. – jamesqf Feb 14 '15 at 19:25
  • @jamesqf - true. There's also the large slice of prison population who are there for drug crimes - and the demographics most likely to be atheist self-identified (affluent whites) are ALSO most likely to NOT be caught and/or convicted of those. – user5341 Feb 15 '15 at 02:10
  • 4
    I'd think a reasonable interpretation of the claim is that atheists commit fewer crimes, *all other things being equal*. In that case, answers should at least attempt to control for other factors known to be associated to crime rate, such as socioeconomic conditions. – Nate Eldredge Feb 15 '15 at 05:11
  • @dvk the question is about correlation. Confounding factors are interesting but relatively unimportant: if, for example, most atheists are wealthy and wealthy people commit less crimes, then atheists commit less crimes (answer is yes). Everyone here is mature enough to distinguish correlation from causation and avoid the unsubstantiated argument that atheism causes anything. Atheism is a non-belief and cannot cause anything. – Sklivvz Feb 15 '15 at 09:11
  • @jamesqf - correct. In my answer, I used the stats (a) for specifically violent crimes, not all incancerations and (b) for late 1980s, when there were a lot less political crime (as well as when official stats for real crime were less of a complete lie) – user5341 Feb 15 '15 at 14:14
  • 1
    The question is unanswerable, for the simple reason that, even limited to violent & property crimes, we simply don't know who actually commits most crimes. This link http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/clearances gives statistics on clearance rates. Even assuming (contrary to all experience) that police are always correct, it's clear that they never discover who committed most crimes. – jamesqf Feb 15 '15 at 22:17
  • @jamesqf You may be right. Got any suggestions? – Brian M. Hunt Feb 16 '15 at 12:23
  • @jamesqf someone made a statement. the question is asking what is the evidence behind that statement. How is it unanswerable? – Sklivvz Feb 16 '15 at 13:42
  • @Sklivvz: As I said (and provided a link to FBI stats as evidence), we don't know who commits most crimes. Therefore we have no way of knowing whether they're committed by atheists or not. It's possible (in theory, anyway) that atheists might actually commit more crimes, but are smart enough not to get caught very often :-) – jamesqf Feb 17 '15 at 06:30
  • @jamesqf right: if so (and note, you are contradicting 70 years of criminology and sociology), then the answer is that the evidence behind the claim is poor. The question is still answerable. – Sklivvz Feb 17 '15 at 08:28
  • 1% is approximately the percentage of the US population that declares itself to be atheist. – DJClayworth Feb 23 '15 at 21:08
  • I don't fully trust studies based on the avowed religion of jail and prison inmates. Even though I am an atheist, when was jailed, I declared by childhood religion of Christianity when faced with that question on the intake forms. I felt that was far safer than to risk becoming a target of some fundamentalist jailors ire. While I have no way of knowing, I imagine that's not an uncommon occurrence. And while I would never be facing a parole board, it's easy to see how that might also enter into the calculus of religious declarations of potential prisoners, and probably explains a number of jail –  Apr 05 '15 at 20:29
  • 2
    @Alex That is 100% bull feces. – cwallenpoole Apr 09 '15 at 18:31

2 Answers2

28

It depends.

The author did publish a peer-reviewed article in 2009 discussing the issue, with sources. I've verified most of the sources and they seem to be reliable and reputable.

Criminality and Moral Conduct

In many people’s minds – and as expressed so clearly in Psalm 14 cited at the outset of this essay – atheism is equated with lawlessness and wickedness, while religion is equated with morality and law-abiding behavior. Does social science support this position?

Although some studies have found that religion does inhibit criminal behavior (Baier and Wright 2001; Powell 1997; Bainbridge 1989; Elifson et al. 1983; Peek et al. 1985) others have actually found that religiosity does not have a significant effect on inhibiting criminal behavior (Cochran et al. 1994; Evans et al. 1996; Hood et al. 1996). ‘‘The claim that atheists are somehow more likely to be immoral,’’ asserts Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi (2007, 306), ‘‘has long been disproven by systematic studies.’’

Admittedly, when it comes to underage alcohol consumption or illegal drug use, secular people do break the law more than religious people (Benson 1992; Gorsuch 1995; Hood et al. 1996; Stark and Bainbridge 1996). But when it comes to more serious or violent crimes, such as murder, there is simply no evidence suggesting that atheist and secular people are more likely to commit such crimes than religious people. After all, America’s bulging prisons are not full of atheists; according to Golumbaski (1997), only 0.2 percent of prisoners in the USA are atheists – a major underrepresentation.

If religion, prayer, or God-belief hindered criminal behavior, and secularity or atheism fostered lawlessness, we would expect to find the most religious nations having the lowest murder rates and the least religious nations having the highest. But we find just the opposite.

Murder rates are actually lower in more secular nations and higher in more religious nations where belief in God is deep and widespread (Jensen 2006; Paul 2005; Fajnzylber et al. 2002; Fox and Levin 2000). And within America, the states with the highest murder rates tend to be highly religious, such as Louisiana and Alabama, but the states with the lowest murder rates tend to be among the least religious in the country, such as Vermont and Oregon (Ellison et al. 2003; Death Penalty Information Center, 2008). Furthermore, although there are some notable exceptions, rates of most violent crimes tend to be lower in the less religious states and higher in the most religious states (United States Census Bureau, 2006). Finally, of the top 50 safest cities in the world, nearly all are in relatively non-religious countries, and of the eight cities within the United States that make the safest-city list, nearly all are located in the least religious regions of the country (Mercer Survey, 2008).

Atheism, Secularity, and Well-Being: How the Findings of Social Science Counter Negative Stereotypes and Assumptions, Phil Zuckerman, Sociology Compass 3/6 (2009): 949–971, 10.1111/j.1751-9020.2009.00247.x

In short, his argument is as follows:

  1. There's tons of studies, but a lot of contradictions.

    • We can say with certainty that religion is a good influence on drug use and other "vicimless" crimes -- they are called "anti-ascetic" crimes in the literature I've read.

    • There is no clear signal that religion inhibits violent crimes (there are many articles disagreeing with each other, lots of discussion about confounding factors, questionable methodologies, etc.)

    • Atheists are majorly underrepresented in prisons, although of course this doesn't prove the point, but certainly disproves that atheism causes criminal behavior.

  2. There's a negative correlation between large scale atheism and crime.

    • More secular countries have lower violent crime rates.

    • More secular US states have the lowest violent crime rates, more religious US state the highest.

    • The safest cities are either in less-religious countries or when in the US they are in less-religious states.

My personal opinion is that many of these studies tend to be poorly constructed. For example many studies on crime rely on objectionable proxy variables which are then contested by other studies. Is reporting that "one doesn't trust policemen" a reliable indicator of delinquency? Is religious literacy a good proxy for religiousness?

This particular article attempts to put together what we know about the subject of atheism, but of course its argument can't be stronger than its sources.

Sklivvz
  • 78,578
  • 29
  • 321
  • 428
  • 11
    I think there is a good deal of truth in the idea that atheists (and agnostics, pagans, &c) tend to be immoral, IF we allow mainstream religion to set the definition of morality. – jamesqf Feb 17 '15 at 06:39
  • 3
    Also, a point on the more secular countries, but most of them also have a higher standard of living overall as well. Since there are ties between violent crime and poverty you need to control for that in studies as well. – rjzii Feb 17 '15 at 16:12
  • 5
    @rjzii sure, but then you also need to correct for atheism being the cause of better education... there is no easy answer or obvious criticism to his points, in my opinion. – Sklivvz Feb 17 '15 at 18:02
  • 1
    @jamesqf I don't think that religions has been setting the morality agenda since illuminism. In fact, it is a conservative force, whereas atheism and secularism have historically been progressive forces, morally speaking. Right to abortion, divorce, homosexual rights... these battles were fought *against religious morality*. – Sklivvz Feb 17 '15 at 18:04
  • 1
    @Sklivvz Valid points but that's part of the reason why it is so hard to make conclusions on this topic. Showing that atheists commit few crimes is fairly straightforward, showing that atheism is why they commit few crimes is hard. – rjzii Feb 17 '15 at 18:08
  • @Sklivvz: Yes, that's exactly what I meant. IF one subscribes to a religion which defines those things as immoral, then most atheists, pagans, secular humanists and so on are immoral, no? Indeed, I don't even like to use the word 'moral' outside of a religious context. – jamesqf Feb 17 '15 at 18:21
  • As the question is about committing crimes according to the jurisdictions of the USA, is morality just an aside? Or is there more depth to it? – Brian M. Hunt Feb 18 '15 at 03:25
  • @Brian M. Hunt: I was commenting on the mentions of morality in this particular answer, which I think is something that needs to be understood if it's to be accepted as being a meaningful answer to the original question. – jamesqf Feb 18 '15 at 20:23
  • I'm wondering if this is related to [the other question you answered recently](http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/26763/are-secular-atheist-adults-less-vengeful-nationalistic-militaristic-authorita) - that is, the us-them divide makes people less likely to empathize with their upcoming victims (in what should be direct contradiction to the tenets of a number of religions, but whatever). – Clockwork-Muse Feb 22 '15 at 10:46
  • Maybe peoples with higher indices of criminality become more religious. I've read somewhere that feeling lack of control in ones live may cause to seek refuge in spirituality. – rraallvv Apr 09 '15 at 10:05
  • «"one doesn't trust policemen" a reliable indicator of delinquency» — given current state of events in US, that is indicator of reading the news :-P – vartec Apr 09 '15 at 18:53
  • Worth noting that the 0.2% of prisoners are atheists stat is outdated: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/07/16/what-percentage-of-prisoners-are-atheists-its-a-lot-smaller-than-we-ever-imagined/ Edit: Sorry, commented before reading the answer below with the same link – Basic Apr 15 '15 at 02:48
  • 1
    I'd personally guess that the correlation is backwards, it's probably higher living standards which lead to both lower crime rates (due to lower poverty overall) *and* an increase in secularism/atheism (due to more widespread access to education which in turn leads to less dependence on social conformity, which is the main propagator of religiousness). As usual, correlation does not imply causation. – Oskuro Jan 05 '17 at 09:36
10

To the best of our inadequate data, the answer is Yes.

A FOIA request shows prisoners who identify as Atheist are 1/10 to 1/20th (depending on whose survey we look at for rates of atheism) as common in prison as in the general population.

Loren Pechtel
  • 1,111
  • 7
  • 14
  • 11
    This is totally invalid--you can't make such a comparison because (1) you're relying on self identification and (2) you're not normalizing for demographics (atheists are likely to be affluent whites, who get sentenced less often even for committing crimes {especially drug related which is a large part of US prison population} - and are less likely to commit violent crime in the first place). – user5341 Feb 15 '15 at 02:08
  • As I said, inadequate data. It's certainly not conclusive but it totally doesn't support the notion that the religious commit fewer crimes. – Loren Pechtel Feb 15 '15 at 04:46
  • If you have inadequate data then you can't make a definitive answer. At best you can say that the evidence appears to support the conclusion or, more realistically, that more research is needed. – rjzii Feb 15 '15 at 04:58
  • 1
    @DVK: I agree, but doesn't the same logic also invalidate your answer? You're not normalizing for demographics either. – Nate Eldredge Feb 15 '15 at 05:14
  • 27
    @DVK Of course you are relying on self identification! You have some mind-reading device that can tell you what religion someone believes? – Loren Pechtel Feb 15 '15 at 05:34
  • 7
    You need to remove confounding factors before you compare inmates to general population. For example, wealth can give you better lawyers and less chance of landing in jail, and we know for a fact that atheists tend to be wealthier... This is to say, there will be religious people jailed because they are poor but innocent, and atheists who are not jailed while guilty because they are rich. – Sklivvz Feb 15 '15 at 09:16
  • 2
    @LorenPechtel - the question wasn't "are there less people who are self identifying as atheists in jail". It was "do atheists commit far fewer crimes". So, your supporting evidence is NOT adequate to support a "Yes" answer methodologically. The first sentence based on your reference shouldn't be "yes", it should be "unknown" - in large part because you don't have a mind reading device. – user5341 Feb 15 '15 at 16:09
  • 2
    @Sklivvz - The confounding factor of wealth would seem to be particularly problematic, since the decisions that lead to atheism may (arguably) be the same mental processes that lead to wealth. In other words, it may not be wealth *per se* that is confounding but perhaps having a better legal defence. – Brian M. Hunt Feb 15 '15 at 16:40
  • 1
    @BrianM.Hunt yep, also, poverty leads to crime so it's two ways. – Sklivvz Feb 15 '15 at 18:32
  • 3
    Sorry, the stat you quote is useless as it stands. You have to account for confounding and bias in the statistic and you don't even acknowledge they might affect the conclusion. – matt_black Feb 15 '15 at 20:08
  • 1
    @matt_black I pointed out that the data is inadequate, it's just the best we have. I mostly posted it as a rebuttal to DVK's now-downvoted answer that reached the opposite conclusion. – Loren Pechtel Feb 16 '15 at 04:12
  • 2
    This is indeed very good evidence that atheists criminals are better at not being caught. – nico Feb 16 '15 at 09:46
  • 4
    @nico that they are better at not getting convicted* – Sklivvz Feb 16 '15 at 13:41
  • @Sklivvz: Poverty leads to crime? Tell that to Bernie Madoff, or any of the politicians (too numerous to mention, or even remember) caught taking bribes. I wonder if there are reliable statistics on criminal tendencies among the prosperous, and how one would control for the lack of need. That is, I might be perfectly willing to rob convenience stores, but I can make much more money with less effort writing software :-) – jamesqf Feb 17 '15 at 18:32
  • @DJClayworth where did you get 5%? It says "less than half of 1%". – Dan Feb 23 '15 at 22:33
  • 2
    @Sklivvz We don't know for a fact that atheists tend to be richer. Atheists appear marginally wealthier on average than the general population if you'd believe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_and_religion and if you believe that population wealth reduces incarceration then Jews seem to be the richest by a fair margin. They have an incarceration rate of 1.7% and is 1.7-2.6% of the population for comparison. I agree that this answer could use demographics though, it's not useful for more than propaganda. – Kit Sunde Apr 06 '15 at 11:33
  • @jamesqf, Not "leads to", but correlation. There have been lots and lots of studies in sociology confirming this correlation already... surely if you Google you can find them. – Pacerier Oct 17 '15 at 18:25