Studies Conclude: Atheism = Peace, Religion = Confliction

[Evointrinsic]

I have already addressed the incident Jason, Yes, there are atheist nations out there that dont do too well. I agree with you... do you understand? however, the majority of the nations in the world that tend to be in more conflicts than anyone else are those who have the highest population of Muslims in their country, which is just above the ones that have the highest population of Christians in their country. It has virtually no effect if one country has a leftist stand on things if all the other ones are generally the same. It would be the same case if all but one of the christian countries were the most peaceful. in fact, i'm sure you all wouldnt be arguing this much over that one nation simply because it's a christian one.

But the fact is, if that one nation was the bad apple, and all the others were good. the general conclusion would be that that view point may actually be helping that country out.

 

[jasoncran]

then you should have stated MUSLIM nations not include all religions

then you could get a more agreement from these posters. as that is painfully obviously, but you didnt why?

and we have do have an american muslim here who will adrees the muslim side of the house.

 

[Evointrinsic]

Interesting information Cheyenne K, what is the time frame in relation to those numbers?

I for one believe that religion can teach a lot of good lessons and may present itself as peaceful. but the ones that become extremists are the ones who happen to cause the most conflict.

As for your statistics, it would be interesting to find out if those people were religious or were related to religious people. unfortunately, I doubt there is information about that that's readily available.

 

[Evointrinsic]

then you should have stated MUSLIM nations not include all religions

then you could get a more agreement from these posters. as that is painfully obviously, but you didnt why?

and we have do have an american muslim here who will adrees the muslim side of the house.

Because I wanted to see the Christians view point. not including the christian group would be quite biased. Although it seems including them seemed to do the same thing anyways. Although there are some great posts. there are quite a few people that are just trying to slander other view points than to focus mainly on the statistics themselves.

 

[Pard]

uh, evo, this "vile, barbaric, and full of violence" christian nation supports the u.n. without the u.s who would stop the genocides?
we donate the most to the u.n. next to us is the japanese.
the, u.n. pressured us to go to in the koreas , we didt want to and so on.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations

Very good point. The GPi doesnt even consider the millions of dollars countries give for aid, or the billions of dollars donated each year... Take that into consideration I bet the top countries drop a good five points and America would end up int he top 5, easy!

Cheyenne makes a good point also, suicide is violence and it reflects on the violent nature of a nation. Or... maybe it just reflects on the lack of faith in those countries... Hmm, new study: Atheists more Prone to Willingly "Meeting Their Maker"...

And Presidents are not always the rulers of a nation. For example, in America the President is a 3rd of the federal governments power... What about the other 2/3? I know the Supreme Court is stocked with atheists... and every other member of Congress is an atheist is disguise!

Lastly, like everything run or endorsed by the U.N., GPi is biased in favor of liberal, European countries...

And speaking of statistics, the GPi data doesn't consider nation size or population. A country like America will take much more money to defend herself than Finland. It should also take into effect which countries are typically aggressive and which are defensive. Maybe take in law, I see the video adds Sharia law, but what about France, Germany, Austria, England, and a slew of other European countries that effectively run Sharia law? The very fact that this study uses the GPi is enough to prove it is a worthless, biased study.

 

[Pard]

Forgot to add this:

For America, does the GPi take into account that we spend MUCH of our defense budget on OTHER countries? Japan is under our protection. How about South Korea? How about the fact that we have to fund American soldiers who work for the UN, while all the other soldiers are funded by the UN? Also, the US defense budget covers things you wouldn't even consider to be "military". Does it take into account increases and decreases in crime rates? American crimes rates have been on the decrease for years... European crimes rates have only been going up!

Does it take into account factors like education and literacy? It is no secret that a more literate population is a less violent one. Does it factor out crime committed by non-nationals in another country? 90+% of the homicide warrants in Arizona are for non-USA citizens...

Does it factor int he intensity of the atheist groups in a country? I turn on the news and all I hear is atheists screaming and whining... So, you tell me, if the only thing I hear on the news is atheists, are we all that Christian in thinking?

And so everyone knows... These questions all have the same answer: NO!

 

[jasoncran]

ok. but you are wrong on the president having to be a christian to get elected.

here's why
a true christian is one indeed and in action, that follows christ and his teachings


obama, believes that the bible is full of errs, romans is archaic, calls sin good. romans was written by the apostle paul ,and he was a follower of christ. christ appointed him to office of apostle. if paul was wrong and wasnt in good standing when he wrote that, what does that make christ, inept and a liar.
for paul wrote a good portion of the nt. the statement that obama calls archaic is the romans 1:25 to 1:30 on gays and that lifestyle. if that is wrong then the ot that corresponds to it is aslo bad.

jesus says that not one of jot or tittle of the law shall pass till all be fulfilled, obama denies this, his claim makes jesus a liar. one cant be a follower of christ and call him a liar.

yet despite this , christians and a host of others voted for him.

just because one claims one is a christian, doenst make them so. for you know my people by thier fruits.



i could add the clintons to this list, and some others.

 

[Drew]

It's outstanding that you've never met a (or many) good atheists.

It is important to note that an atheist who grows up in a country with a strong religious cultural history will unavoidably be influenced by concepts and values that originate from the associated "religious" worldview.

So it is almost impossible to identify a "pure" atheist in such a country - someone who can truthfully assert that the totality of their worldview is free from "religious" influence.

 

[jasoncran]

It's outstanding that you've never met a (or many) good atheists.

It is important to note that an atheist who grows up in a country with a strong religious cultural history will unavoidably be influenced by concepts and values that originate from the associated "religious" worldview.

So it is almost impossible to identify a "pure" atheist in such a country - someone who can truthfully assert that the totality of their worldview is free from "religious" influence.

yes, that is true as most athiests in the u.s have benefited from the influences of the christian world view.

to care for the least of these is found mainly in the bible not some athiestic book or belief.
the very science that athiests espouse was founded by a christian man, francis bacon. and many of the early men of science were christians.

 

[Drew]

yes, that is true as most athiests in the u.s have benefited from the influences of the christian world view.

I agree. And I will anticipate that the atheist will reply that "we atheists would have developed those 'good' religious values even if we were embedded in an entirely secular society".

That would be speculation, of course.

 

[Evointrinsic]

The GPi doesnt even consider the millions of dollars countries give for aid, or the billions of dollars donated each year... Take that into consideration I bet the top countries drop a good five points and America would end up int he top 5, easy!

You know what! I bet you are 100% correct! Unfortunately, that's a completely different statistic all together.

Cheyenne makes a good point also, suicide is violence and it reflects on the violent nature of a nation. Or... maybe it just reflects on the lack of faith in those countries... Hmm, new study: Atheists more Prone to Willingly "Meeting Their Maker"...

Once again, i would LOVE to see those statistics become more accurate. and I would be very interesting in finding out if religious view, or lack there of, has any effect on the suicide rate. Unfortunately, the violence that this statistic is talking about is confliction between another country and itself. Suicide is not violence towards other people, it may effect other people in negative ways, but it isnt physically hurting anyone, there for is not considered as valuable information within this statistic. Once again, this would belong somewhere else.

And Presidents are not always the rulers of a nation. For example, in America the President is a 3rd of the federal governments power... What about the other 2/3? I know the Supreme Court is stocked with atheists... and every other member of Congress is an atheist is disguise!

I dont think you realize that this statistic is talking about the population of a country, not who is running it. otherwise there would be no use for the population measurement presented in the information of this statistic.

Lastly, like everything run or endorsed by the U.N., GPi is biased in favor of liberal, European countries...

Once again, I can give you multiple studies on this information that point to the exact same outcomes. This one just so happens to be the one that is most easily accessible and in the simplest format. You seem to have completely missed the PDF file in the original post. This is a different organization presenting their own information with the same outcome.

And speaking of statistics, the GPi data doesn't consider nation size or population. A country like America will take much more money to defend herself than Finland. It should also take into effect which countries are typically aggressive and which are defensive. Maybe take in law, I see the video adds Sharia law, but what about France, Germany, Austria, England, and a slew of other European countries that effectively run Sharia law? The very fact that this study uses the GPi is enough to prove it is a worthless, biased study.

A country like america has a lot more enemies than Finland, there for needs to spend more money to defend itself. I do agree that the general statistics within that video do need some touch up's, however I can guarantee you that you will have the exact same outcome. this ISN'T the only information out there that shows these values. There are A LOT of statistics that show the exact same outcome.

 

[Evointrinsic]

Does it take into account factors like education and literacy? It is no secret that a more literate population is a less violent one. Does it factor out crime committed by non-nationals in another country? 90+% of the homicide warrants in Arizona are for non-USA citizens...

I completely agree, however, this study isnt focusing on those points! there for it does not need to involve them! This study has nothing to do with the literacy of populations, it has everything to do about belief systems. Is this so difficult to understand?

Your equivalent argument for another study of the average death rate would be something along the lines of "Why arent they including the birth rate of these countries as well?!?". That's because the study isnt focusing on the birth rate is it? Then you'd ask "Well this study doesnt show why these people died". Once again! it has nothing to do with that, it has only to do with the specific population and when they died. that is all the study is about. if we ask the questions you are asking, then we would make a new study that addresses that issue. but we are only focusing on this one single topic!

 

[Cheyenne K]

Interesting information Cheyenne K, what is the time frame in relation to those numbers?

I for one believe that religion can teach a lot of good lessons and may present itself as peaceful. but the ones that become extremists are the ones who happen to cause the most conflict.

As for your statistics, it would be interesting to find out if those people were religious or were related to religious people. unfortunately, I doubt there is information about that that's readily available.

The time frame was the last time the dates where the statistics readily available. I believe the farthest back one was 1994, though most were closer to the present.

Also, for your second point on whether or bnot they were religious, or related to the reeligious. For the former it may be hard to identify. For instance, a family may think their child to be of whatever religion, while the child may have been another without their knowledge. So that would definitly be difficult to determine. For the latter, to some extent as well. Religious =/= spiritual. They may turn out to be one or the other.

I see a trend though as far as many of these (Atheist) countries go however. I know Japan puts much emphasis on education and intelligence, while many of the European nations listed put much on education as well as the more pleasurable things in life such as sex. From a Christian point of view, I would wonder if there is something missing as far as life goes. There is only so much of one thing a person can handle before becoming bored with or disliking it. However, this would also be near impossible to study scientifically.

 

[Evointrinsic]

ok. but you are wrong on the president having to be a christian to get elected.

here's why
a true christian is one indeed and in action, that follows christ and his teachings

I realize that claiming to be a christian doesnt actually make you a christian. However, that is one way Obama was able to make it into the seat. If he outright said that he was an atheist before the election, i bet you anything he wouldnt have made it. Although times are changing yet again, and things like that really wont matter soon, in this current day and age, in america it is political suicide to outright state that your an atheist. I realize that you had presidents before that thought otherwise, and I realize that the forefathers never meant for church and state to conflict. but within the past years, it has been an issue if you were to run for presidency.

It is important to note that an atheist who grows up in a country with a strong religious cultural history will unavoidably be influenced by concepts and values that originate from the associated "religious" worldview.

So it is almost impossible to identify a "pure" atheist in such a country - someone who can truthfully assert that the totality of their worldview is free from "religious" influence.

It doesnt matter what an atheist's view is on religion or if a religion has influenced that individual. all that needs for a person to be an atheist is their idea that there is no god. that is it. there is no such thing as a "Pure" or "impure" atheist by your definition. It does not exist in either manner. You just have to not believe in any deities, that is it...

to care for the least of these is found mainly in the bible not some athiestic book or belief.
the very science that athiests espouse was founded by a christian man, francis bacon. and many of the early men of science were christians.

There is no such thing as an atheistic belief. Atheists arent bound by specific beliefs, we can believe in whatever we want without restriction. the only thing that is the same for all atheists is the disbelief of a god.

As for your science your talking about, there is once again no such thing as a founder of science. A founder of a specific theory, yes. But Egyptians used scientific methods to do many things, including medical procedures. as well as Mayan cultures and virtually any culture in the world. You cannot create science, you can only discover it.

However, this is getting off topic, so i'll create a new one for it! :D

 

[logical bob]

I have a theory that the connection works the other way round. I think you'll find more atheists in peaceful societies. That's because stable societies are likely to be more prosporous and have better education and more public engagement in culture. It's certainly the case that more educated people are more likely to be atheists and less likely to hold fundamentalist beliefs.

Meanwhile, people with difficult lives in difficult places are more likely to seek the comfort and consolation of religion.

Just a thought. I'm obviously not saying this holds for all individuals. The USA might also be something of an exception, though I know plenty of American atheists.

 

[Evointrinsic]

for your second point on whether or bnot they were religious, or related to the reeligious. For the former it may be hard to identify. For instance, a family may think their child to be of whatever religion, while the child may have been another without their knowledge. So that would definitly be difficult to determine. For the latter, to some extent as well. Religious =/= spiritual. They may turn out to be one or the other.

Yes, unfortunately true. It would be interesting to know, however

I see a trend though as far as many of these (Atheist) countries go however. I know Japan puts much emphasis on education and intelligence, while many of the European nations listed put much on education as well as the more pleasurable things in life such as sex. From a Christian point of view, I would wonder if there is something missing as far as life goes. There is only so much of one thing a person can handle before becoming bored with or disliking it. However, this would also be near impossible to study scientifically.

Thank you for being so rational about all of this. Although i wouldn't say there is only so much of one thing a person can handle. After all, I have a friend in the Cayman Islands that's being doing research on an endangered species there for over 35 years now. I doubt he'd ever stop Passion is a powerful thing :D

What would you think is missing? out of curiousity

 

[jasoncran]

yes, but athiest often harp on the lack of caring for the poor such as you just did with the the age thing.

so where did these that have no common beliefs get that? from darwin?

you made the claim that the athiest countries are the most peaceful, and have the longest span of life.
so not caring for the poor isnt a concern in this countries.

 

[logical bob]

yes, that is true as most athiests in the u.s have benefited from the influences of the christian world view.

I agree. And I will anticipate that the atheist will reply that "we atheists would have developed those 'good' religious values even if we were embedded in an entirely secular society".

That would be speculation, of course.

Actually I agree with you. I'm very much a Christian atheist because I come from a culture strongly influenced by Christianity. But Western culture was also strongly shaped by the Ancient Greeks and nobody believes in Zeus.

 

[Cheyenne K]

Thank you for being so rational about all of this. Although i wouldn't say there is only so much of one thing a person can handle. After all, I have a friend in the Cayman Islands that's being doing research on an endangered species there for over 35 years now. I doubt he'd ever stop Passion is a powerful thing :D

What would you think is missing? out of curiousity

Bless him. As an artist and a writer, I can share his sentiments. However, given those professions, I'd wind up having to due to some sort of psychosis. But that's besides the point.

I really couldn't place my finger on what would be missing, to be honest. But I can say that before I started following Christ, things in life hit me a lot harder than they do now and I was a lot more depressed. Perhaps there is a lack of optimism if a situation doesn't look like it's going to get better. Or even just a lack of purpose or point to something. I understand quite well that some people have a passion, but I wonder for those who don't and how far that some people's passion would go. Often I myself would even wonder what the point of life was if I would only die in the end.

 

[Evointrinsic]

yes, but athiest often harp on the lack of caring for the poor such as you just did with the the age thing.

so where did these that have no common beliefs get that? from darwin?

you made the claim that the athiest countries are the most peaceful, and have the longest span of life.
so not caring for the poor isnt a concern in this countries.

That would be complete speculation. I may also add that Darwin has nothing to do with atheism. once again, the only requirement to be an atheist is to not believe in any deity. that's it...

I for one have been traveling for the past 4 years on my own for conservation work for wildlife as well as helping build shelters, schools and homes in a third world country. I've always been an atheist, and although I have read the bible as well as the Qur'an, I've done so after the more "moral" things i've had the chance to take a part in.

So your claim that atheists dont help, is complete bull to say the least.