Religiosity vs. The American Dream

Scientific study has shown that there is a link between the degree of religiosity* in a country and its wealth.

One scientist writing for Science Magazine perceives the trend as follows:


"In modern nations, nonreligion and the acceptance
of evolution become popular when the
middle class majority feels sufficiently secure and safe,
thanks to low income inequality, universal health care,
job and retirement security...Religion thrives
when the majority seek the aid and protection of
supernatural powers because they are impoverished,
as in the third- and second-world countries."

Notice the following graph, where wealth is plotted against religiosity:



Interestingly, the United States is the only "First World" country that is an exception to this general trend. It has one of the highest Per Capita GDP, but it is far more religious than other "First World" countries, with around 60% of the population either 'not sure' or 'completely against' evolution.



"In the case of the United States... the majority of
Americans fear losing their middle-class status as a result
of limited government support, high levels of social pathology,
and intense economic competition and income disparity."

Particularly separating the United States from other "First World" countries is its income disparity: the wealthiest 1% of Americans own 33% of the wealth, while the wealthiest 20% of Americans own more than 80% of the wealth. According to this scientist's viewpoint, this disparity is what allows America to be wealthy and have a high religiosity at the same time. Additionally, this may not change very much, as:

"More than 60 percent of Americans whose parents scaled the top 20% of the income ladder have reached the top 20% themselves... By contrast, 65 percent of Americans with parents from the lowest fifth of earners remain stuck in the bottom two-fifths."


Given the findings, does this mean the American Dream conflicts with religious belief?
Given the US's wealth distribution, do you think the American Dream more myth or reality? Is religion merely a function of security?
_______________________________________________________

*Religiosity doesn't refer to whether or not one is atheist or a believer, as one can believe in a religion but have low religiosity-- and the terms is slightly subjective. But some would calculate it by "rating prayer frequency, religious belief, importance, and church attendance," at least for Christians, according to this source.

Cocaine vs. Crack | 1:100

In 1986, congress passed the Anti-Drug Abuse Act in response to mounting fears, suspicions, and assumptions about crack cocaine (as opposed to powder). The death of a basketball player, who was thought to have OD'd on crack (he actually OD'd on powder cocaine), led to a lot of media attention, and congress passed the law in response.

At the time, there were beliefs that crack was worse than powder cocaine, causing increased crime rates, being more addictive, being more likely to cause psychosis/death, etc. Now, it is known that powder cocaine and crack cocaine are exactly the same pharmacologically: one gram of powder is equally potent as one gram of powder.

However, the law passed differentiated between cocaine and crack in an extreme and irrational manner, such that the penalty for possessing one gram of crack has the equivalent criminal sentencing of 100 grams of powder cocaine. As a result, the mandatory minimum prison sentence for 5 grams of crack (the weight of 5 sugar packets) is five years, while more than one pound of cocaine will result in that same sentence.

It turns out, the only real difference between crack cocaine and powder cocaine are the people who use it. Crack cocaine tends to be preferred by African-American drug users, while powder cocaine tends to be preferred by whites. The results of the law have been surprising:

"In 1986, before mandatory minimums for crack offenses became effective, the average federal drug offense sentence for blacks was 11% higher than for whites. Four years later following the implementation of harsher drug sentencing laws, the average federal drug offense sentence was 49% higher for blacks." -source

Additionally, "Most drug offenders are white. Five times as many whites use drugs as blacks. Yet blacks comprise the great majority of drug offenders sent to prison."-source

...And I don't really know quite what to make of this: "more than 80% of the defendants sentenced for federal crack cocaine offenses are African American, despite the fact that more than 66% of crack users are white or Hispanic."-source

And even when law officials realized the disparity between blacks and whites with incarceration soon after the law's passage, no action was taken. Today, it is still a law, although, finally, presidents (both Bush and Obama) and congresspeople have started speaking about the law, and preliminary new laws are present in both houses of Congress. (There is still a ways to go, however.)

Is it negligence that caused this to take so long? What are other laws passed under such irrational circumstances? Why is it possible for trends, craze, & suspicion to cause such devastating laws, yet scientific refutation and regret take forever to undo these damages? Why are African Americans overrepresented in the prison system for crack use more than other crack-using minorities?