Why Is America So Religious?

[buckeye]

Why Is America So Religious?
http://blow.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/29/why-is-america-so-religious/

September 29, 2008, 11:38 am
Why Is America So Religious?
By Charles M. Blow

I found this chart buried in a study entitled “Unfavorable views of Jews
and Muslims on the Increase in Europe”
http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=262
(which is quite disturbing). The report is part of the Pew Research
Center’s Global Attitudes Project.

The chart shows that the wealthier a country is, the less important
religion is to that country. The one exception: The United States.

[ the chart which goes here in the article interesting in itself ]

From the study:

“The clear exception to this pattern is the United States, which is a
much more religious country than its degree of prosperity would suggest.
Despite its wealth, the United States is in the middle of the global pack
when it comes to the importance of religion. Indeed, on this question, the
U.S. is closer to considerably less developed nations such as India, Brazil
and Lebanon than to other western nations.”

Why do you think this is? Let’s discuss …
************************************************************************
[end article]

There are 453 comments to the above article which can be read there online

***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:

The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm

American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm

The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html

[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]

HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/

***************************************************************
. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote

"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"

That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.

It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.

*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************

[Nosterill]

Why Is America So Religious?http://blow.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/29/why-is-america-so-religious/
September 29, 2008, 11:38 am
Why Is America So Religious?
By Charles M. Blow
I found this chart buried in a study entitled “Unfavorable views of Jews
and Muslims on the Increase in Europe”http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=262
(which is quite disturbing). The report is part of the Pew Research
Center’s Global Attitudes Project.
The chart shows that the wealthier a country is, the less important
religion is to that country. The one exception: The United States.
[ the chart which goes here in the article  interesting in itself ]
    “The clear exception to this pattern is the United States, which is a
much more religious country than its degree of prosperity would suggest.
Despite its wealth, the United States is in the middle of the global pack
when it comes to the importance of religion. Indeed, on this question, the
U.S. is closer to considerably less developed nations such as India, Brazil
and Lebanon than to other western nations.”
Why do you think this is? Let’s discuss …
************************************************************************

Wow! That's quite an anomaly. The other surprise - for me - was Russia
ranking as more religious than most of Western Europe despite
generations of suppression. That kind of resilience in the face of
oppression is initially heart warming but it also paints a depressing
picture for the future. Irrational religiosity seems to be so deeply
ingrained that it will be around for as long as humans are.

[t***@gmail.com]

Post by Nosterill

Why Is America So Religious?http://blow.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/29/why-is-america-so-religious/
September 29, 2008, 11:38 am
Why Is America So Religious?
By Charles M. Blow
I found this chart buried in a study entitled “Unfavorable views of Jews
and Muslims on the Increase in Europe”http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=262
(which is quite disturbing). The report is part of the Pew Research
Center’s Global Attitudes Project.
The chart shows that the wealthier a country is, the less important
religion is to that country. The one exception: The United States.
[ the chart which goes here in the article  interesting in itself ]
    “The clear exception to this pattern is the United States, which is a
much more religious country than its degree of prosperity would suggest.
Despite its wealth, the United States is in the middle of the global pack
when it comes to the importance of religion. Indeed, on this question, the
U.S. is closer to considerably less developed nations such as India, Brazil
and Lebanon than to other western nations.”
Why do you think this is? Let’s discuss …
************************************************************************

Wow! That's quite an anomaly. The other surprise - for me - was Russia
ranking as more religious than most of Western Europe despite
generations of suppression. That kind of resilience in the face of
oppression is initially heart warming but it also paints a depressing
picture for the future. Irrational religiosity seems to be so deeply
ingrained that it will be around for as long as humans are.- Skjul tekst i anførselstegn -
- Vis tekst i anførselstegn -

I think that you will find that the combination of suppression of
religion and alienation from the government will make religion
popular. Look at Ireland and Poland, or Iran under the Shah. The
establishment of a stable, representative government and prosperity
will result in a decline in religion - Ireland for example in the past
20 years.

[Phlip]

I think that you will find that the combination of suppression of religion
and alienation from the government will make religion popular.

Which is precisely why televangelist "religion" seeks to undermine stability
in society and government.

[Mike Painter]

Post by Phlip

Post by t***@gmail.com
I think that you will find that the combination of suppression of
religion and alienation from the government will make religion
popular.

Which is precisely why televangelist "religion" seeks to undermine
stability in society and government.

Art Hoppe of the San Francisco Examiner recognized this years ago.
During Viet Nam he wanted to fly B-52's oveer the country and carpet bomb
them with...
Sears Roebuck catalogs.
They could order anything they wanted and it would be delivered and set up
at no cost.
It would stop the killing, it would be cheaper than bombs, and it would turn
them all into capitalists.

[Alex W.]

Post by Mike Painter

Post by Phlip

Post by t***@gmail.com
I think that you will find that the combination of suppression of
religion and alienation from the government will make religion
popular.

Which is precisely why televangelist "religion" seeks to undermine
stability in society and government.

Art Hoppe of the San Francisco Examiner recognized this years ago.
During Viet Nam he wanted to fly B-52's oveer the country and carpet bomb
them with...
Sears Roebuck catalogs.
They could order anything they wanted and it would be delivered and set up
at no cost.
It would stop the killing, it would be cheaper than bombs, and it would
turn them all into capitalists.

That may be something to consider for Afghanistan today ...

... with the possible refinement of long-term service contracts which will
lock them into the relationship.

[Phlip]

Post by Alex W.

Post by Mike Painter
Art Hoppe of the San Francisco Examiner recognized this years ago.
During Viet Nam he wanted to fly B-52's oveer the country and carpet bomb
them with...
Sears Roebuck catalogs.
They could order anything they wanted and it would be delivered and set
up at no cost.
It would stop the killing, it would be cheaper than bombs, and it would
turn them all into capitalists.

That may be something to consider for Afghanistan today ...
... with the possible refinement of long-term service contracts which will
lock them into the relationship.

Ouch. That sure explains our endless succession of new, cheap vacuum
cleaners...

[Alex W.]

"Nosterill" <***@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:c28d418a-749e-4ded-8770-***@t42g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

The other surprise - for me - was Russia
ranking as more religious than most of Western Europe despite
generations of suppression. That kind of resilience in the face of
oppression is initially heart warming but it also paints a depressing
picture for the future. Irrational religiosity seems to be so deeply
ingrained that it will be around for as long as humans are.

=================

It should not surprise you. External oppression and persecution is a
reliable mechanism for intensifying the adherence to a faith. Look at the
Jews -- a millennium or more of almost uninterrupted discrimination,
prejudice and pogroms pretty much ensured their survival. Come a tolerant,
open society, though -- as in Britain and the US -- and they began to
disperse and assimilate.

I am quite convinced that if the Roman authorities in the first and second
centuries had simply disregarded that weird cult of Jesus followers,
Christianity would never have succeeded as it did. No martyrs, no outside
pressure to push you closer into the embrace of your religion, no clearly
defined lines between "us" and them" -- at best, it would have been a
minority faith living alongside other religions.

[Middle Class Warrior]

Post by buckeye
Why Is America So Religious?
http://blow.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/29/why-is-america-so-religious/
September 29, 2008, 11:38 am
Why Is America So Religious?
By Charles M. Blow
I found this chart buried in a study entitled “Unfavorable views of Jews
and Muslims on the Increase in Europe”
http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=262
(which is quite disturbing). The report is part of the Pew Research
Center’s Global Attitudes Project.

The US is wealthy, but the wealth is concentrated at the top. the
distribution of wealth and income is more equitable in European
countries. The social system does a better job in Europe of caring for
it citizens so there is little need to pray for better days.

The Europeans saw the failure of religion in WW 2. In particular the
Catholic Church never stood up against fascism and NAZIsm and paid a
price when these forces of darkness were defeated by the Allied forces.
Keep in mind, too, that there is more robust socialist movement in
Europe than in the US and many socialists are atheist or agnostic. The
US was spared the horrors that devastated Europe in WW 2 which affected
the faith of many Europeans.

Many Americans believe in God because they thinks it will somehow
benefit their family or assure their passage into Heaven which has
always been the big payoffs in religion. I believe in myself and do not
believe supernatural forces have affected my life one bit.

You can study moral philosophy to arrive at universal principals such as
Kant's categorical imperative. Like some Jews I plan to make my heaven
on Earth and don't believe in Judeo-Christian fairy tales about a
hereafter.

I think my values and attitude toward other people, races and
nationalities is more centered and humane than people who call
themselves Christian. I do not fell compelled to change anyone to my way
of thinking which is a virtue of Buddhism and Judaism.

Americans are horribly conformist which may also explain their need to
belong to a church. I view a church as fundamentally a tax free sales
organization that has the goal to build bigger and better churches and
church schools to indoctrinate more people into a particular creed.
There are churches that do devote tremendous energy and resources to
charities and national disasters that struck New Orleans and Galveston.
This seems to be the exception rather than the rule.

When George Bush wanted to get the government out of the welfare
business, the evangelicals were not happy about it because they claimed
that is not what they do. I would certainly agree. Expanding the flock
and fund raising seems to be the top priorities. Churches are more like
businesses today.

Sorry, but this is not my cup of tea. I'm opting out.

[Sla#s]

Post by buckeye
Why Is America So Religious?

<SNIP>>

Post by buckeye
"The clear exception to this pattern is the United States, which
is a much more religious country than its degree of prosperity would
suggest. Despite its wealth, the United States is in the middle of
the global pack when it comes to the importance of religion. ...

Could it be that the USA is not as wealthy as it thinks it is?
Some parts of the US are a lot poorer that would be acceptable in Europe!
Could it be that it is not the average wealth but the half below the average
that delineates the religiosity?
Is it for example the poorer half that are the drivers of US religiosity?

Slatts

[Tim McGaughy]

Post by Sla#s

Post by buckeye
Why Is America So Religious?

<SNIP>>

Post by buckeye
"The clear exception to this pattern is the United States, which
is a much more religious country than its degree of prosperity would
suggest. Despite its wealth, the United States is in the middle of
the global pack when it comes to the importance of religion. ...

Could it be that the USA is not as wealthy as it thinks it is?
Some parts of the US are a lot poorer that would be acceptable in Europe!
Could it be that it is not the average wealth but the half below the
average that delineates the religiosity?
Is it for example the poorer half that are the drivers of US religiosity?

I wouldn't count on it. Oh, they certainly do their part, but it's a
cycle of sorts.

The poor believe the religious crap because their rich leaders do. The
rich PRETEND to believe the religious crap, because it makes the poor
more easily led.

They feed off each other.

[buckeye]

:|>
:|> Why Is America So Religious?
:|> http://blow.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/29/why-is-america-so-religious/
:|>
:|> September 29, 2008, 11:38 am
:|> Why Is America So Religious?
:|> By Charles M. Blow
:|<snip>
:|
:|buckeye, I'd *like* to know what you think of such things as you post
:|when you post 'em.

Really?
That is kewl.


***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:

The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm

American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm

The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html

[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]

HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/

***************************************************************
. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote

"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"

That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.

It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.

*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************

[buckeye]

:|>>:|
:|>>:|buckeye, I'd *like* to know what you think of such things as you post
:|>>:|when you post 'em.
:|>
:|> Really?
:|> That is kewl.
:|<snip>
:|
:|Yes, really. Instead of your typical cut'n'paste - anyone can do that
:|- tell us what you think and why. I see very little value reading
:|cut'n'paste posts. It's like walking downtown and encountering some guy
:|wearing a sandwich board who's shouting at everyone but saying nothing
:|of his own.

(1) Frankly I could care less what find value in or what you read or don't
read.

(2) I have been here since Feb 1995, and most people know exactly where I
stand, what I think on the topic of church state and church state
separation. If you don't that's too bad.

(3) You would know exactly what I think on that subject if you bothered to
check out any of the URLs in my signature

(4) =========================================================
WHAT I AM ABOUT

(1) The Radical Religious Right/theocrats have been learning and learning
well how to use all aspects of the internet, including the UseNet
newsgroups to further their goals

I am returning the favor My posts take two forms:

(A) Pro strict separation of church and state and consists of various
things from a variety of sources, Primary source documents, scholars, etc.
including our own website. (My replies fall under this almost exclusively)

(B) Keeping people informed about the opposition by posting things the
theocratic radical religious right is doing, saying, posting publishing
etc.

I usually identify these with the comments "THEOCRACY IN ACTION
Propaganda, misinformation. misrepresenting, lies, the tools of the
theocrats" for that is what it is

BTW, there are theocrats, i e radical religious right groups and
individuals, thus using that term is not name calling. it is identifying.
The theocrats, the radical religious right do want to set up a theocratic
society. They do not deny it

That is a far cry from the usual labeling or name calling done when people
use terms such as liberals, conservatives, atheists, fundies, and so on and
so forth

The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm

American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm

(2) While I do have some structured formal legal training, and thus am not
just a layman in the area, I am not a lawyer. Therefore, I don't interpret
the Constitution. I leave that to experts who are qualified.
What I do is not at all complicated, though many people seem to
have a hard time dealing with what I do. Based on the reactions to what I
do by many people. Most notably, those that I have provided evidence that
their claims were incorrect. In short, those that were a bit embarrassed.
What I do is summed up in the following:
If one were to read that which I provide (the URLs and my overall
posts/replies that I post) They would see that I not only stated facts, I
provided evidence backing up that which I have posted. I supply
information from experts in the field, usually from more than one source. I
frequently provide the entire document, which makes for long posts, but
also provides the complete context the information existed in originally.
When I provide quotes, I will properly and completely cite that quote,
using the standard rules of citation. Frequently, I will provide primary
source historical and or legal data. I do not merely provide my opinion.
In fact, seldom do I ever provide my opinion. My personal opinion is
irrelevant.
Have I educated? I would hope so. If one would have read the
information that I provided, examined it and explored further...maybe
looking up the works I cited (from which, if secondary source material is
provided, is from some of the best scholars, and respected qualified
contemporary thinkers on this topic in the field ). If one would have done
that, they would have had the potential to have learned some things.
I am prepared to respond with evidence, and facts, and will state
when something I provide is a personal belief and as already pointed out, I
rarely post my own beliefs so that would be rare.
I am not here to "debate", not here to argue, not here to give
legitimacy by even discussing false, flawed, misrepresenting or otherwise
bogus theories, personal opinions or personal beliefs. I will point out
and rebut with primary and secondary source data, facts, etc each of those
that I find. I will point out each and every improperly cited quote, each
bogus quote and to be quite honest, any improperly cited quote has to be
viewed as being bogus until someone provides a proper cite for it.
If attacked personally, I will give as good as I get. Those who
troll will be so labeled. Those who are more concerned with spreading
propaganda and or unsubstantiated claims and are not are not interested in
facts, truth, etc will be so identified. I am very big on the following:

Your unsubstantiated claim is noted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ordinary or extraordinary claims require ordinary or extraordinary proof.
If you're going to claim something and especially something outlandish
you're going to need some pretty extraordinary and/or irrefutable proof to
back up such a claim. "Where's the beef?" Where's the ordinary or
extraordinary proof for their ordinary or extraordinary claims? If one is
not responding with ordinary or extraordinary, *factual* proof, then the
claim is not worth considering
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[ as ***@nospam said]
Why is asking for "proof" considered truculence? Do you consider it
truculence for a judge to ask for evidence in a trial. Would you rather
that people just testified that they believed in the guilt of the suspect?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
[as Gray Shockley said:]
Your "opinion" is not an adequate citation.
You forgot your citations.
Or, are your opinions more valid than facts?
You do realize, do you not?, that opinion without substantiation is just
propanganda for those without critical thinking abilities and originate
with those who are attempting to manipulate rather than those who are
attempting to clarify.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote

"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"

That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.

It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
I expect people to back up their claims and if their claims have any merit,
they should be able to back them up with evidence from others, properly
cited, of course.
Anyone can be incorrect about something, but once a person has
been shown with evidence that they were incorrect about something, and they
ignore that and continue saying the same things in another thread in
another newsgroup or continue in the same thread and same newsgroup, they
have lost any and all rights to respect and will be so identified for who
and what they are.
A person doesn't have to agree with the material, however, their
saying they don't agree with it, isn't good enough. They are going to have
to show, with their own evidence, point by point, that which I have
provided is "incorrect." After all, that is what I do with the claims they
have made.
I target my posts and replies to the REAL audience. The Real
audience is not the person I am replying to. In all probability, their mind
is already made up. The real audience are those who come into the various
newsgroups and read posts and replies found there, but seldom if ever post
or reply themselves.
The real audience that matters are those who came yesterday will
come today and will come tomorrow and thanks to web crawlers like those run
by Google many, many, many, tomorrows after that. Those are the people who
in time may actually make a difference.
The above is what I am about.

***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:

The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm

American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm

The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html

[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]

HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/

***************************************************************
. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote

"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"

That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.

It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.

*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************

[Therion Ware]

Post by buckeye
Why Is America So Religious?
http://blow.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/29/why-is-america-so-religious/
September 29, 2008, 11:38 am
Why Is America So Religious?
By Charles M. Blow
I found this chart buried in a study entitled “Unfavorable views of Jews
and Muslims on the Increase in Europe”
http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=262
(which is quite disturbing). The report is part of the Pew Research
Center’s Global Attitudes Project.
The chart shows that the wealthier a country is, the less important
religion is to that country. The one exception: The United States.
[ the chart which goes here in the article interesting in itself ]
“The clear exception to this pattern is the United States, which is a
much more religious country than its degree of prosperity would suggest.
Despite its wealth, the United States is in the middle of the global pack
when it comes to the importance of religion. Indeed, on this question, the
U.S. is closer to considerably less developed nations such as India, Brazil
and Lebanon than to other western nations.”

I read an interesting piece recently (can't for the life of me
remember where...) that suggested that the religious propensity of
people in the USA can be at least partly explained by the uncertainty
of life in that country: lack of a NHS, little in the way of social
safety nets, at-will employment, et al. Undoubtedly simplistic, but I
thought it an interesting and fairly original take on the, ah,
problem...

[Phlip]

Post by Therion Ware
I read an interesting piece recently (can't for the life of me
remember where...) that suggested that the religious propensity of
people in the USA can be at least partly explained by the uncertainty
of life in that country: lack of a NHS, little in the way of social
safety nets, at-will employment, et al. Undoubtedly simplistic, but I
thought it an interesting and fairly original take on the, ah,
problem...

The poorer a household, the greater the proportional value of its religious
icon.

[DanielSan]

Post by Phlip

Post by Therion Ware
I read an interesting piece recently (can't for the life of me
remember where...) that suggested that the religious propensity of
people in the USA can be at least partly explained by the uncertainty
of life in that country: lack of a NHS, little in the way of social
safety nets, at-will employment, et al. Undoubtedly simplistic, but I
thought it an interesting and fairly original take on the, ah,
problem...

The poorer a household, the greater the proportional value of its religious
icon.

Loading Image...

[Phlip]

Post by DanielSan

Post by Phlip
The poorer a household, the greater the proportional value of its
religious icon.

http://the-wawg-blog.org/wp-images/5-2006/Religion_rank_wealth.png

My browser can't hit that.

Post by DanielSan
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *

Of course, the poor Athiest households have a small shrine to Carl Sagan...

[Phlip]

Post by Phlip

Post by DanielSan
http://the-wawg-blog.org/wp-images/5-2006/Religion_rank_wealth.png

My browser can't hit that.

http://the-wawg-blog.org/?m=200605

Good stuff tx.

[DanielSan]

Post by Phlip

Post by DanielSan

Post by Phlip
The poorer a household, the greater the proportional value of its
religious icon.

http://the-wawg-blog.org/wp-images/5-2006/Religion_rank_wealth.png

My browser can't hit that.

Get a better browser?

Post by Phlip

Post by DanielSan
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *

Of course, the poor Athiest households have a small shrine to Carl Sagan...

What's an "Athiest"?

[Phlip]

Post by DanielSan

Post by Phlip
Of course, the poor Athiest households have a small shrine to Carl Sagan...

What's an "Athiest"?

Someone who is so "more skeptical than thou" that they pretend they can't
read past simple typos on chat forums.

[DanielSan]

Post by Phlip

Post by DanielSan

Post by Phlip
Of course, the poor Athiest households have a small shrine to Carl Sagan...

What's an "Athiest"?

Someone who is so "more skeptical than thou" that they pretend they can't
read past simple typos on chat forums.

Sorry, but you have TWO typos there. 1) You capitalized the letter "A".
Since "atheist" is not a proper noun, there was no need to capitalize
it (unless it were part of a title but then you didn't capitalize the
"H" in "households") and 2) spelling it "athiest" shows an utter
disregard for what the word means.

[Jack]

Post by DanielSan

Post by Phlip

Post by DanielSan

Post by Phlip
Of course, the poor Athiest households have a small
shrine to Carl Sagan...

What's an "Athiest"?

Someone who is so "more skeptical than thou" that they
pretend they can't read past simple typos on chat forums.

Sorry, but you have TWO typos there.

shut up

[DanielSan]

Post by Jack

Post by DanielSan

Post by Phlip

Post by DanielSan

Post by Phlip
Of course, the poor Athiest households have a small
shrine to Carl Sagan...

What's an "Athiest"?

Someone who is so "more skeptical than thou" that they
pretend they can't read past simple typos on chat forums.

Sorry, but you have TWO typos there.

shut up

No.

[Phlip]

Post by Phlip

Post by DanielSan
What's an "Athiest"?

Someone who is so "more skeptical than thou" that they
pretend they can't read past simple typos on chat forums.
Sorry, but you have TWO typos there.

Sorry, but I already said "typos". Plural.

You are now making things up in order to reply to them. Strawman argument.
That's not very skeptical of you.

[Dag Yo]

Europe: enlightenment and kept going with it.
USA: revivals

Why Is America So Religious?http://blow.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/29/why-is-america-so-religious/
September 29, 2008, 11:38 am
Why Is America So Religious?
By Charles M. Blow
I found this chart buried in a study entitled “Unfavorable views of Jews
and Muslims on the Increase in Europe”http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=262
(which is quite disturbing). The report is part of the Pew Research
Center’s Global Attitudes Project.
The chart shows that the wealthier a country is, the less important
religion is to that country. The one exception: The United States.
[ the chart which goes here in the article interesting in itself ]
“The clear exception to this pattern is the United States, which is a
much more religious country than its degree of prosperity would suggest.
Despite its wealth, the United States is in the middle of the global pack
when it comes to the importance of religion. Indeed, on this question, the
U.S. is closer to considerably less developed nations such as India, Brazil
and Lebanon than to other western nations.”
Why do you think this is? Let’s discuss …
************************************************************************
[end article]
There are 453 comments to the above article which can be read there online
***************************************************************
The Rise of the Theocratic States of Americahttp://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Presenthttp://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and Statehttp://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&Statehttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
***************************************************************
. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
. . .
****************************************************************
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************