I don't see how the US having a lot of religious people is an issue...
While religion is difficult to define, one standard model of religion, used in religious studies courses, was proposed by Clifford Geertz, who simply called it a "cultural system".
Religion is often viewed as a cultural system of behaviors and practices, world views, sacred texts, holy places, ethics, and societal organisation that relate humanity to what an anthropologist has called "an order of existence".
A critique of Geertz's model by Talal Asad categorized religion as "an anthropological category". Richard Niebuhr's (1894-1962) five-fold classification of the relationship between Christ and culture, however, indicates that religion and culture can be seen as two separate systems, though not without some interplay.
So, there is at least interplay between and possibly substantial overlap between culture and religion. The implication is that the degree of religiousness is an - at least partial - indicator of the presence of culture.
Religion can be viewed as representing values (what is good/bad) as well as norms (how to behave). The subsequent implication is that if there is religiousness, then there are values and norms.
when I say freedom from norms I mean the US(or American society) lets people work outside those norms....
As if one can actually detach from society....
the US let people do it before other major countries did...
The
Virginia Declaration of Rights is a document drafted in 1776 to proclaim the inherent rights of men, including the right to reform or abolish "inadequate" government. It influenced a number of later documents, including the United States Declaration of Independence (1776), the United States Bill of Rights (1789), and the French Revolution's Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789).
Ten articles of the VDoR were initially drafted by
George Mason circa May 20–26, 1776. Mason based his initial draft on the rights of citizens described in earlier works such as the
English Bill of Rights (1689), and the writings of
John Locke.
Locke fled to the
Netherlands in 1683. During his five years in Holland, Locke chose his friends "from among the same freethinking members of dissenting Protestant groups as
Spinoza's small group of loyal confidants. Locke almost certainly met men in Amsterdam who spoke of the ideas of that renegade Jew who... insisted on identifying himself through his religion of reason alone." While she says that "Locke's strong empiricist tendencies" would have "disinclined him to read a grandly metaphysical work such as Spinoza's
Ethics, in other ways he was deeply receptive to Spinoza's ideas, most particularly to the rationalist's well thought out argument for political and religious tolerance and the necessity of the separation of church and state."
In the Netherlands, Locke had time to return to his writing, spending a great deal of time re-working the
Essay and composing the
Letter on Toleration. Locke did not return home until after the
Glorious Revolution. Locke accompanied
William of Orange's wife back to England in 1688. The bulk of Locke's publishing took place upon his return from exile – his aforementioned
Essay Concerning Human Understanding, the
Two Treatises of Civil Government and
A Letter Concerning Toleration all appearing in quick succession.
The US Constitution owes much to Dutch influences ... ;-)
the constitutional freedom FROM religion gave people more space to work with at a time where religion in other countries not only played a key role in society but also government....
The US constitution does give freedom FROM religion. Religion being seen as a private rather than a public matter. The constitution only served to not have a STATE RELIGION. Its about government off your back.
People can be of faith but still create works of art literature etc that contradict their faith...
Has nothing to do with what was posted earlier.
the concept of personal freedom is so deeply engraved in the society that society as a whole can never shut that person down(France just proved how backward they are compared to America in case of personal liberties)...
Read Geert Hofstede's work (Culture's consequences).
First you claim US has no culture, now US is so forward compared to France.
As Hofstede said: culture can only exists from comparison.
http://www.geerthofstede.com/geert
you in Europe have a collective sense of "Us" or "We"...If We as French people do not like it we wont let you do it.....in the US it is always Me and I....It is I may not like it but you can do whatever you want....
Geert Hofstede's cultural dimensions, one of them being Individualism versus Collectivism. All cultures vary on this dimension.
https://geert-hofstede.com/cultural-dimensions.html
https://geert-hofstede.com/national-culture.html
Secularism is a norm in france...and religion is in the US....
Church and State are very seperated in US. But people in the US as more religious than in France.
guess who enforces those norms and who doesnt....that's what I meant we are free from those norms because nobody enforces them on us...most people still might choose to follow them but they don't have to.
US and France differ in their attitude towards government, Americans don't want strong government. Hence, it is also not the task of government to enforce norms > see Hofstede
http://www.geerthofstede.com/media/1105/whatsonmymindfeb2008.doc
The fact that GOVERNMENT isn't enforcing doesn't mean norms dont get enforced. However, enforcement then becomes a social thing. Go live in the deep south for a while ;-)
Cuisine: Yes I know what a cuisine is...I know there are differences between Sicilian cuisine and Mainland Italaian cuisine....but collectively the world calls them Italian cuisine....the French have a lot of local cuisines too..but collectively they are called French cuisine...India probably has more diversity among its local cuisine but everybody calls it Indian cuisine collectively...America does not have that....it literally is a mixture of different European cuisines from the early settlers...then it got heavily influenced by Italians,Chinese ,Japanese and now Indians are coming into the picture.
Eg Chinese cuisine is just as much a sum total of very different regional cuisines as American cuisine is.
I really can't be bothered with discussing cuisines. You are making something out of nothing here.
They are young people outside the US...for example rap...a lot of white people in this country would never accept Rap as a part of their culture...but it is as American as it can get....go read the history of hiphop...it did not start of as banging girls and having bling bling...it started of as an art of dissent...then it got exported into other countries where they started to use it for dissent...that is the American culture...Rap is freedom from the norm...and you see how it got exported through outthe world.
Regarding American entertainment...there are two key reasons why it got so popular...the first reason is because the BRITISH taught the world English....2nd reason is because we have a bigger industry here which means we can invest more in this industry and give directors a lot of freedom to work with and thus make better art....a lot of the series are not even about America or america Centric...GOT has absolutely nothing American about it...one could argue it is more European in flavor...Breaking Bad can be replicated anywhere in the world...it could be the story of any drug manufacutrer in any country....the Brits also make great serials like this..Sherlock.
Fast Food: Yes these companies are everywhere because they took these not-so American food and made a good business model out of it...Starbucks sells coffee...people already drink coffee in other countries...Starbucks just knew how to make money out of making a chain business out of it...coffee is not American..Fried Chicken is Scottish...Pizza is italian , Burgers are arguably German cars are definitely german(Ford just figured out a way to make it cheaper)....American companies just did good business...and Ford? Come on the world runs on japanese cars...i don't see anyone crying about becoming japanized...computers...yes technically most of the development of the PC was American and American companies capitalized on this invention and became global comapnies...The brits invented the turbojet(Whittle) but they failed to capitalize on the product they created...but still the world moves because of the british jet...who ever says we are becoming british because we use jets?
And if using American products make people Americanized...then to you I say welcome to the Global Republic of China.
[/quote]
Like wise: can't seriously be bothered to discuss this.
https://geert-hofstede.com/united-states.html
USofA 40 91 62 46 26 68
France 68 71 43 86 63 48
United StatesFrance
From left to right:
PowerDistance = US < FR
Individualism = US > FR
Masculinity = US > FR
Uncertainty Avoidance = US < FR
Long Term Orientation= US < FR
Indulgence= US > FR
This explains the difference in attitude towards burkini quite well on the basis of national culture
Compare your personal cultural preferences to a country of your interest — take the
Culture Compass
Power Distance Index (PDI)
This dimension expresses the degree to which the less powerful members of a society accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. The fundamental issue here is
how a society handles inequalities among people. People in societies exhibiting a large degree of Power Distance accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification. In societies with low Power Distance, people strive to equalise the distribution of power and demand justification for inequalities of power.
Individualism versus Collectivism (IDV)
The high side of this dimension, called individualism, can be defined as a preference for a loosely-knit social framework in which individuals are expected to take care of only themselves and their immediate families. Its opposite, collectivism, represents a preference for a tightly-knit framework in society in which individuals can expect their relatives or members of a particular in-group to look after them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty. A society's position on this dimension is reflected in
whether people’s self-image is defined in terms of “I” or “we.”
Masculinity versus Femininity (MAS)
The Masculinity side of this dimension represents a preference in society for achievement, heroism, assertiveness and material rewards for success. Society at large is more competitive. Its opposite, femininity, stands for a preference for cooperation, modesty, caring for the weak and quality of life. Society at large is more consensus-oriented. In the business context Masculinity versus Femininity is sometimes also related to as
"tough versus tender" cultures.
Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI)
The Uncertainty Avoidance dimension expresses the degree to which the members of a society feel uncomfortable with uncertainty and ambiguity. The fundamental issue here is how a society deals with the fact that the future can never be known: should we try to control the future or just let it happen?
Countries exhibiting strong UAI maintain rigid codes of belief and behaviour and are intolerant of unorthodox behaviour and ideas. Weak UAI societies maintain a more relaxed attitude in which practice counts more than principles.
Long Term Orientation versus Short Term Normative Orientation (LTO)*
Every society has to maintain some links with its own past while dealing with the challenges of the present and the future. Societies prioritize these two existential goals differently.
Societies who score low on this dimension, for example, prefer to maintain time-honoured traditions and norms while viewing societal change with suspicion. Those with a culture which scores high, on the other hand, take a more pragmatic approach: they encourage thrift and efforts in modern education as a way to prepare for the future.
In the business context this dimension is related to as "(short term) normative versus (long term) pragmatic" (PRA). In the academic environment the terminology Monumentalism versus Flexhumility is sometimes also used.
Indulgence versus Restraint (IND)
Indulgence stands for a society that allows relatively free gratification of basic and natural human drives related to enjoying life and having fun. Restraint stands for a society that suppresses gratification of needs and regulates it by means of strict social norms.
https://geert-hofstede.com/national-culture.html
Point. 
