Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

The Dark Side of Faith (article on Red vs Blue state morals)

2024 Website Hosting Fees

Total amount
$905.00
Goal
$1,038.00
S

Soma-Sight

Guest
The dark side of faith



By ROSA BROOKS

IT'S OFFICIAL: Too much religion may be a dangerous thing.

This is the implication of a study reported in the current issue of the Journal of Religion and Society, a publication of Creighton University's Center for the Study of Religion. The study, by evolutionary scientist Gregory S. Paul, looks at the correlation between levels of "popular religiosity" and various "quantifiable societal health" indicators in 18 prosperous democracies, including the United States.

Paul ranked societies based on the percentage of their population expressing absolute belief in God, the frequency of prayer reported by their citizens and their frequency of attendance at religious services. He then correlated this with data on rates of homicide, sexually transmitted disease, teen pregnancy, abortion and child mortality.

He found that the most religious democracies exhibited substantially higher degrees of social dysfunction than societies with larger percentages of atheists and agnostics. Of the nations studied, the U.S.  which has by far the largest percentage of people who take the Bible literally and express absolute belief in God (and the lowest percentage of atheists and agnostics)  also has by far the highest levels of homicide, abortion, teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.

This conclusion will come as no surprise to those who have long gnashed their teeth in frustration while listening to right-wing evangelical claims that secular liberals are weak on "values." Paul's study confirms globally what is already evident in the U.S.: When it comes to "values," if you look at facts rather than mere rhetoric, the substantially more secular blue states routinely leave the Bible Belt red states in the dust.

Murder rates? Six of the seven states with the highest 2003 homicide rates were "red" in the 2004 elections (Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, South Carolina), while the deep blue Northeastern states had murder rates well below the national average. Infant mortality rates? Highest in the South and Southwest; lowest in New England. Divorce rates? Marriages break up far more in red states than in blue. Teen pregnancy rates? The same.

Of course, the red/blue divide is only an imperfect proxy for levels of religiosity. And while Paul's study found that the correlation between high degrees of religiosity and high degrees of social dysfunction appears robust, it could be that high levels of social dysfunction fuel religiosity, rather than the other way around.

Although correlation is not causation, Paul's study offers much food for thought. At a minimum, his findings suggest that contrary to popular belief, lack of religiosity does societies no particular harm. This should offer ammunition to those who maintain that religious belief is a purely private matter and that government should remain neutral, not only among religions but also between religion and lack of religion. It should also give a boost to critics of "faith-based" social services and abstinence-only disease and pregnancy prevention programs.

We shouldn't shy away from the possibility that too much religiosity may be socially dangerous. Secular, rationalist approaches to problem-solving emphasize uncertainty, evidence and perpetual reevaluation. Religious faith is inherently nonrational.

This in itself does not make religion worthless or dangerous. All humans hold nonrational beliefs, and some of these may have both individual and societal value. But historically, societies run into trouble when powerful religions become imperial and absolutist.

The claim that religion can have a dark side should not be news. Does anyone doubt that Islamic extremism is linked to the recent rise in international terrorism? And since the history of Christianity is every bit as blood-drenched as the history of Islam, why should we doubt that extremist forms of modern American Christianity have their own pernicious and measurable effects on national health and well-being?

Arguably, Paul's study invites us to conclude that the most serious threat humanity faces today is religious extremism: nonrational, absolutist belief systems that refuse to tolerate difference and dissent.

My prediction is that right-wing evangelicals will do their best to discredit Paul's substantive findings. But when they fail, they'll just shrug: So what if highly religious societies have more murders and disease than less religious societies? Remember the trials of Job? God likes to test the faithful.

To the truly nonrational, even evidence that on its face undermines your beliefs can be twisted to support them. Absolutism means never having to say you're sorry.

And that, of course, is what makes it so very dangerous.



http://www.latimes.com/news/printeditio ... mailedlink
 
The dark saide of driving...

Motor vehicles accidents account for more deaths than all natural disasters combined. In fact in the United States your chances of being injured in an motor vehicle accident is better than one in a thousand, in any one year. If you are a male, than you are twice as likely to die in a motor vehicle accident than if you are a female. Yet, if you are a female you are slightly more likely to be injured.

The ages of 16 and 24 are the most dangerous for both sexes. Between the ages of 16 and 64 alcohol figures into over 20% of all fatal accidents, and between the ages of 21 and 44 almost 50% of all fatalities. Between the ages of 16 and 44 the fatality rate has declined since 1975. The most significant decline being in the 16 - 20 age group. About half of all property damage accidents result in injuries or fatalities. Since 1966 the rate of fatalities by population has fallen around 40%, by numbers of drivers over 50%, and by numbers of miles driven by almost 70%.

We are driving allot more miles and driving is still safer. As we are get older we are more likely to die as a pedestrian, but we are more likely to be injured the younger we are. Approximately 15% of people who die because of motor vehicle accidents are pedestrians, bicyclists or other wise not in motor vehicles. Over 2/3 rd's of people who die in vehicles are not properly wearing safety restraints. Your risk of dying in a motor vehicle accident is almost five times more likely in Mississippi than in Massachusetts. You are ten times more likely to die driving a motor cycle than if you are driving any other motor vehicle.

http://www.disastercenter.com/traffic/

:-D
 
This study (Soma-Sight) shows nothing really. Among other things the study lacks a statistic on “actually believers†and also just because one goes to church and/or prayers that does not mean they have faith. The fact remains that many (I mean many) claim to be of a particular faith but the number of actually followers is much smaller.
 
Nocturnal_Principal_X said:
This study (Soma-Sight) shows nothing really. Among other things the study lacks a statistic on “actually believers†and also just because one goes to church and/or prayers that does not mean they have faith. The fact remains that many (I mean many) claim to be of a particular faith but the number of actually followers is much smaller.
Noooo... :smt064 You're supposed to tell how dangerous it can be when getting out of bed in the morning... especially as you get older, right Robert? :lol:
 
It's the normal Soma-Sight "insight" - as long as it knocks Christianity, it is fair game.

But not all are so easily fooled as Soma-Sight.

Hally Hall-I Chu said:
The generalizations used in the new "Religion is bad for society" study are a step backwards for social science.

http://www.therevealer.org/archives/timeless_002105.php

Dr. Mohler said:
Since then, Canadian statistician Scott Gilbreath has written an insightful response to Gledhill's article and to the research article written by Gregory S. Paul and published by the Journal of Religion and Society. Mr. Gilbreath offers a devastating critique of Gregory S. Paul's statistical research, concluding that it falls far short of any adequate statistical method.

Then, in an update to his original article, Mr. Gilbreath reveals some research of his own (and others) -- research that indicates that Gregory S. Paul is actually a "freelance paleontologist" who was previously known for writing and illustrating books on "theropod dinosaurs." Mr. Paul is also identified as a speaker recommended by the Council for Secular Humanism [something not mentioned, of course, in the Journal of Religion and Society article].

Furthermore, Mr. Gilbreath also reveals evidence that the journal doesn't even know who Mr. Paul is, but chose to publish his work anyway. Here is Gilbreath's analysis:

So, what can be pulled together from all this? Gregory Paul has published a study of social problems and religious faith; but he has no apparent expertise or qualifications in social science research so, predictably, said study is statistically invalid. Said study was published by a journal that apparently does not have high standards for articles it publishes, and it does not even know how to contact Mr Paul. Finally, said study makes a ham-handed attempt to portray religious faith as a dangerous and socially destructive force in the U.S., and it transpires that the author is on the Council for Secular Humanism's list of recommended speakers. I think that Mr Paul has successfully played a big con game. He must be admired for that, at least.
http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=311

:biggrin :) :biggrin :)
 
Vic said:
Noooo... :smt064 You're supposed to tell how dangerous it can be when getting out of bed in the morning... especially as you get older, right Robert? :lol:
Uh are you calling me Robert?
 
Vic said:
Nocturnal_Principal_X said:
This study (Soma-Sight) shows nothing really. Among other things the study lacks a statistic on “actually believers†and also just because one goes to church and/or prayers that does not mean they have faith. The fact remains that many (I mean many) claim to be of a particular faith but the number of actually followers is much smaller.
Noooo... :smt064 You're supposed to tell how dangerous it can be when getting out of bed in the morning... especially as you get older, right Robert? :lol:

Hi Vic,

That is correct... :lol:
 
No, I am calling him ^ ^ ^ Robert. :-D

Nocturnal_Principal_X said:
Vic said:
Noooo... :smt064 You're supposed to tell how dangerous it can be when getting out of bed in the morning... especially as you get older, right Robert? :lol:
Uh are you calling me Robert?
 
Nocturnal_Principal_X said:
Vic said:
Noooo... :smt064 You're supposed to tell how dangerous it can be when getting out of bed in the morning... especially as you get older, right Robert? :lol:
Uh are you calling me Robert?

Haven't you learned yet, some of us are never too far away. 8-)
 
Motor vehicles accidents account for more deaths than all natural disasters combined.

HA!

Thats pretty amazing!

And all this apocalyptic talk over a couple hurricanes and a few earthquakes!
 
What is amazing to me is how Gary destroyed this bogus study and it's asinine, easily disputed conclusions.

Good job!



Gary said:
It's the normal Soma-Sight "insight" - as long as it knocks Christianity, it is fair game.

But not all are so easily fooled as Soma-Sight.

Hally Hall-I Chu said:
The generalizations used in the new "Religion is bad for society" study are a step backwards for social science.

http://www.therevealer.org/archives/timeless_002105.php

http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=311[/url]

:biggrin :) :biggrin :)[/quote:56252]
 
BB,

You sure dont know what some of the girls in my "saved" community are up to on friday nights.... :oops:

Lets just leave it at that.... :wink:

There is more drug abuse, sex, and violence in the Christian comunity I know than any "peyote induced" satan worshippers I know of..... :evil:

hehehehehe,

Of course some apologists is going to refute this article!

But what statistical evidence does HE present?

Thats right, its all about FAITH! :bday:
 
bibleberean said:
What is amazing to me is how Gary destroyed this bogus study and it's asinine, easily disputed conclusions.

Good job!



Gary said:
It's the normal Soma-Sight "insight" - as long as it knocks Christianity, it is fair game.

But not all are so easily fooled as Soma-Sight.

Hally Hall-I Chu said:
The generalizations used in the new "Religion is bad for society" study are a step backwards for social science.

http://www.therevealer.org/archives/timeless_002105.php

http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=311[/url]

:biggrin :) :biggrin :)
[/quote:b353f]

I read Gary's links. And honestly, I think they raise some excellent points.

I don't think this study is "proof" of anything. I think it raises some excellent questions deserving of more study.

However, I agree with the critizisms that the study had the opportuniy to supply more statistical analysis and hone the focus, but did not do so.

Regardless, the data on its face certainly raises some interesting questions, even if this study doesn't do a wonderful job of answering them.
 
This reminds me, just after the election the liberal media was reporting that since Bush won with just over fifty percent of the vote, and the new sitcom "desperate housewives" had a tv rating that appeared to surpass any rating that liberals alone could achieve, they assumed that the Christians were watching the show too. One problem though that they conveniently overlooked, only 60% of America votes, while probably 98% watches tv, which pretty much covers it. That didn't stop them from trying to get as much milage as possible from it, since they own the media. There are always people who want their itching ears tickled... :roll:

Liberal teaching: "freedom" = Freedom to choose or do anything never have consequences.

Christian teaching on the same thing: "Sin"= Enslavement with great consequences on self and society.

Once again, the communist will always accuse others of what they themselves are guilty of. It never fails.

Just read a good book called "it takes a family". (hint, hint.)
 
This reminds me, just after the election the liberal media was reporting that since Bush won with just over fifty percent of the vote, and the new sitcom "desperate housewives" had a tv rating that appeared to surpass any rating that liberals alone could achieve, they assumed that the Christians were watching the show too. One problem though that they conveniently overlooked, only 60% of America votes, while probably 98% watches tv, which pretty much covers it. That didn't stop them from trying to get as much milage as possible from it, since they own the media. There are always people who want their itching ears tickled...

Too bad Mrs. Bush watches desparate houswives!!!! :o :o

http://politicalhumor.about.com/b/a/166531.htm

Laura Bush, Desperate Housewife
Political Humor Blog
« Bush and Prince Abdullah's Love Affair | Main | Washington's Evacuation Scare »

From Daniel Kurtzman,
Your Guide to Political Humor.
FREE Newsletter. Sign Up Now!

May 02, 2005
Laura Bush, Desperate Housewife
First Lady Laura Bush stole the show at the annual White House Correspondents' Dinner with a surprise comedy routine in which she ripped President Bush and admitted to being a "desperate housewife."

Grabbing the microphone from her husband, the first lady brought the crowd of political heavyweights and Hollywood celebrities to its feet as she let loose a series of one-liners that included digs at her mother-in-law, tales of going to a male strip club, and a colorful allusion to the time George, um, gave a hand-job to a horse.

By all accounts, it was a vastly superior performance to President Bush's own attempts at comedy from years past, including last year's disastrous WMD gag and an odd routine from the previous year that included a picture of Dick Cheney urinating on a door.

Read highlights as well as the complete transcript of Laura Bush's stand-up act, watch the video, plus check out the Washington Post's amusing account of the annual media gala.

 
Soma-Sight said:
BB,

You sure dont know what some of the girls in my "saved" community are up to on friday nights.... :oops:

Lets just leave it at that.... :wink:

There is more drug abuse, sex, and violence in the Christian comunity I know than any "peyote induced" satan worshippers I know of..... :evil:

hehehehehe,

Of course some apologists is going to refute this article!

But what statistical evidence does HE present?

Thats right, its all about FAITH! :bday:


*********
John here:
Refute what? Your stuff seems to fit right in with it? It is cute, huh? Yet, Revelation 17:1-5 surely is Christ's Word! And the posts with any merit that have been posted? They to tell of the Broad Way ones being lost.

And the danger of being 'Real' Christian? Christ tells of the reward for that Matthew 10:34-39 faithful life, if that is the way it ends.

And the dangerous 'c'hristian?? I was told years ago, to be careful about becoming a Christian by a 'old' time friend.(?) He too taught that it was dangerous to be too.. Christian. (he had no worry) Yet, I did wonder what was meant by his statement's bottom line? He was talking of suicidal tendances.

Well Soma, have learned to believe over the many years, that it was [usaually] the 'professed' Christian one that most often take their own life. And I suspect the reason for this is seen in Judas's make-up & report. It is when one knows that they are [openly] going against the Holy Spirits leading (Roman's 8:14) is when they are in danger! The Holy Spirit will do every thing in His power to have one saved, except use force! But, He will STRIVE with mankind (both me and you!) for a last time! Genesis 6:3. It is only then that satan has his 'full' way with the individual! :crying: Genesis 4:6. If that is their free choice?

It is then that one has hardly any, or no conscience to be 'pricked' by the Holy Spirit, it is then that he does as satan has him 'desire' for the last FINISHED time. (Matthew 12:31-32-1 John 5:16-17) :sad See Acts 9:5's last part of the verse. See Ephesians 4:30 & 1 Thessalonians 5:19
 
Back
Top