Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

S/O of Christian nation

Posted by on Jan. 3, 2013 at 1:39 AM
  • 54 Replies
Studies have been done folks! Why we should fight for a non-Christian nation!



Criminal Behavior:

Citing four different studies, Zuckerman states: "Murder rates are actually lower in more secular nations and higher in more religious nations where belief in God is widespread." He also states: "Of the top 50 safest cities in the world, nearly all are in relatively non-religious countries."

Within the United States, we see the same pattern. Citing census data, he writes: "And within America, the states with the highest murder rates tend to be the highly religious, such as Louisiana and Alabama, but the states with the lowest murder rates tend to be the among the least religious in the country, such as Vermont and Oregon."

And these findings are not limited to murder rates, as rates of all violent crime tend to be higher in "religious" states. Zuckerman also points out that atheists are very much under-represented in the American prison population (only 0.2%).

Marriage and Family:

Zuckerman cites a 1999 Barna study that finds that atheists and agnostics actually have lower divorce rates than religious Americans.

He also cites another study, in Canada, that found conservative Christian women experienced higher rates of domestic violence than non-affiliated women.

Unprotected Sex:

As for Plante's claim that studies have "consistently " found that religious people are less likely to engage in unprotected sex, that claim is directly refuted by a 2009 study that found the reverse - teens who make religion-inspired "virginity pledges" are not only just as likely as their non-pledging peers to engage in premarital sex, but more likely to engage in unprotected sex.

Other Findings of Interest:

Happiness: The most secular nations in the world report the highest levels of happiness among their population.

Altruism: Secular nations such as those in Scandinavia donate the most money and supportive aid, per capita, to poorer nations. Zuckerman also reports that two studies show that, during the Holocaust, "the more secular people were, the more likely they were to rescue and help persecuted Jews."

Outlooks and Values: Zuckerman, citing numerous studies, shows that atheists and agnostics, when compared to religious people, are actually less likely to be nationalistic, racist, anti-Semitic, dogmatic, ethnocentric, and authoritarian. Secularism also correlates to higher education levels. Atheists and other secular people are also much more likely to support women's rights and gender equality, as well as gay and lesbian rights. Religious individuals are more likely to support government use of torture.

Of course, studies can be cherry-picked to present religiosity in a better light than above, and the point of this article is not to prove the moral superiority of secularism. Nevertheless, whatever Plante wishes to cite, it is impossible to claim that studies "consistently" support his claims of positive social outcomes correlating to religion. To the contrary, the weight of most data seems to indicate that religiosity is a poor indicator of social health or personal virtue.

To Plante's credit, he acknowledges that religion is not necessary for ethical behavior. Still, the thrust of his message attempts to make a case for religion (and implicitly critical of secularism) that simply isn't supported by facts. Most secular individuals would not argue with him when he asserts that religion might help some to be good, and even when he argues that religious institutions can sometimes help toward that end, but such claims do nothing to justify the perpetuation of plain falsehoods regarding atheists, agnostics, and secular humanists, falsehoods that in turn perpetuate prejudice against them.

The rest of the article can be found here:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/our-humanity-naturally/201103/misinformation-and-facts-about-secularism-and-religion




I think it speaks pretty strongly against a Christian nation. In fact, it speaks prerrt strongly against any nation being of one majority religion....like our founding fathers said before statistics.
by on Jan. 3, 2013 at 1:39 AM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
cueballsmom
by Member on Jan. 3, 2013 at 2:08 AM

BUMP!

romalove
by SenseandSensibility on Jan. 3, 2013 at 7:54 AM
4 moms liked this

I love this article.  Thank you for posting!

Anyone who wishes to think we are a "Christian nation" is welcome to look at any theocracy around the world and ask themselves if they think theocracy is a good idea.

29again
by Gold Member on Jan. 3, 2013 at 7:58 AM
2 moms liked this

There is a huge difference between being a Christian nation, and being a theocracy.

romalove
by SenseandSensibility on Jan. 3, 2013 at 7:59 AM


Quoting 29again:

There is a huge difference between being a Christian nation, and being a theocracy.

How would you separate that out?

I'll give an example.

I would say we are a secular nation but have a majority Christian populace.  That does not make us a Christian nation.

How can the nation be of a religion, in this case Christian, and not be considered theocratic?

29again
by Gold Member on Jan. 3, 2013 at 8:11 AM


Quoting romalove:


Quoting 29again:

There is a huge difference between being a Christian nation, and being a theocracy.

How would you separate that out?

I'll give an example.

I would say we are a secular nation but have a majority Christian populace.  That does not make us a Christian nation.

How can the nation be of a religion, in this case Christian, and not be considered theocratic?

The way that I see this is that a theocracy has one particular "religion" as the dominant and accepted religion throughout the country.  Christianity has so many different factions to it, that even if this country were considered a Christian nation, it would not be a theocracy.  For instance, if Catholicism were the choice of most of the populace, and our laws were written to follow the Catholic church, and anyone NOT a catholic were "not quite as good as" the rest of the population, then I would consider this a theocracy.  Does that make sense?

romalove
by SenseandSensibility on Jan. 3, 2013 at 8:15 AM


Quoting 29again:


Quoting romalove:


Quoting 29again:

There is a huge difference between being a Christian nation, and being a theocracy.

How would you separate that out?

I'll give an example.

I would say we are a secular nation but have a majority Christian populace.  That does not make us a Christian nation.

How can the nation be of a religion, in this case Christian, and not be considered theocratic?

The way that I see this is that a theocracy has one particular "religion" as the dominant and accepted religion throughout the country.  Christianity has so many different factions to it, that even if this country were considered a Christian nation, it would not be a theocracy.  For instance, if Catholicism were the choice of most of the populace, and our laws were written to follow the Catholic church, and anyone NOT a catholic were "not quite as good as" the rest of the population, then I would consider this a theocracy.  Does that make sense?

I think I understand what you're saying, but that's not what a theocracy is.

A theocracy is a country run by the laws of a particular religion.  In a Christian theocracy, Christianity would be the religion of the land, others would not be permitted, and laws that Christians wanted passed would be the laws of the land.  In this case, abortion likely would be outlawed because it's against what Christians believe God wants.  That's just one example.

To put it in the perspective of what you wrote, there are Islamic theocracies, yet there are different types of Muslims (like Shi'a and Sunni) and different schools as well.  That there are those differences doesn't make the countries that are Islamic theocracies any "less" theocratic.

29again
by Gold Member on Jan. 3, 2013 at 8:26 AM
1 mom liked this


Quoting romalove:


Quoting 29again:


Quoting romalove:


Quoting 29again:

There is a huge difference between being a Christian nation, and being a theocracy.

How would you separate that out?

I'll give an example.

I would say we are a secular nation but have a majority Christian populace.  That does not make us a Christian nation.

How can the nation be of a religion, in this case Christian, and not be considered theocratic?

The way that I see this is that a theocracy has one particular "religion" as the dominant and accepted religion throughout the country.  Christianity has so many different factions to it, that even if this country were considered a Christian nation, it would not be a theocracy.  For instance, if Catholicism were the choice of most of the populace, and our laws were written to follow the Catholic church, and anyone NOT a catholic were "not quite as good as" the rest of the population, then I would consider this a theocracy.  Does that make sense?

I think I understand what you're saying, but that's not what a theocracy is.

A theocracy is a country run by the laws of a particular religion.  In a Christian theocracy, Christianity would be the religion of the land, others would not be permitted, and laws that Christians wanted passed would be the laws of the land.  In this case, abortion likely would be outlawed because it's against what Christians believe God wants.  That's just one example.

To put it in the perspective of what you wrote, there are Islamic theocracies, yet there are different types of Muslims (like Shi'a and Sunni) and different schools as well.  That there are those differences doesn't make the countries that are Islamic theocracies any "less" theocratic.

And considering the different factions in the Catholic church, there is no difference between using Catholics and Muslims as a comparison.  As I said, IF the majority were Catholic, and our laws were written according to the Catholic church, and others (non-Catholics) were not as good, then this would be a Catholic theocracy.  I think we probably have the same idea in mind, but the words aren't coming out as concisely as I would like this early in the morning.  I definitely need more coffee!

mikiemom
by Silver Member on Jan. 3, 2013 at 9:07 AM

So basically you think freedom of religion means pick your flavor of christianity.

THANK THE GODS and GODESSES YOU ARE WRONG!!!!!!!

Quoting 29again:


Quoting romalove:


Quoting 29again:

There is a huge difference between being a Christian nation, and being a theocracy.

How would you separate that out?

I'll give an example.

I would say we are a secular nation but have a majority Christian populace.  That does not make us a Christian nation.

How can the nation be of a religion, in this case Christian, and not be considered theocratic?

The way that I see this is that a theocracy has one particular "religion" as the dominant and accepted religion throughout the country.  Christianity has so many different factions to it, that even if this country were considered a Christian nation, it would not be a theocracy.  For instance, if Catholicism were the choice of most of the populace, and our laws were written to follow the Catholic church, and anyone NOT a catholic were "not quite as good as" the rest of the population, then I would consider this a theocracy.  Does that make sense?


29again
by Gold Member on Jan. 3, 2013 at 9:20 AM
3 moms liked this

?????  Where did I say that, with any degree of specificity?  Do you understand what an example is? 

Thank God (singular) you weren't writing the Constitution!!

Quoting mikiemom:

So basically you think freedom of religion means pick your flavor of christianity.

THANK THE GODS and GODESSES YOU ARE WRONG!!!!!!!

Quoting 29again:


Quoting romalove:


Quoting 29again:

There is a huge difference between being a Christian nation, and being a theocracy.

How would you separate that out?

I'll give an example.

I would say we are a secular nation but have a majority Christian populace.  That does not make us a Christian nation.

How can the nation be of a religion, in this case Christian, and not be considered theocratic?

The way that I see this is that a theocracy has one particular "religion" as the dominant and accepted religion throughout the country.  Christianity has so many different factions to it, that even if this country were considered a Christian nation, it would not be a theocracy.  For instance, if Catholicism were the choice of most of the populace, and our laws were written to follow the Catholic church, and anyone NOT a catholic were "not quite as good as" the rest of the population, then I would consider this a theocracy.  Does that make sense?



mikiemom
by Silver Member on Jan. 3, 2013 at 9:34 AM

This is not a christian Nation because there are non-christians here and we are aloud to worship as we wish. Thank the Gods and Goddesses for my freedom to not be christian. - oh and I suspect more than one contributer to the constitution had Pagan leanings lol

Quoting 29again:

?????  Where did I say that, with any degree of specificity?  Do you understand what an example is? 

Thank God (singular) you weren't writing the Constitution!!

Quoting mikiemom:

So basically you think freedom of religion means pick your flavor of christianity.

THANK THE GODS and GODESSES YOU ARE WRONG!!!!!!!

Quoting 29again:


Quoting romalove:


Quoting 29again:

There is a huge difference between being a Christian nation, and being a theocracy.

How would you separate that out?

I'll give an example.

I would say we are a secular nation but have a majority Christian populace.  That does not make us a Christian nation.

How can the nation be of a religion, in this case Christian, and not be considered theocratic?

The way that I see this is that a theocracy has one particular "religion" as the dominant and accepted religion throughout the country.  Christianity has so many different factions to it, that even if this country were considered a Christian nation, it would not be a theocracy.  For instance, if Catholicism were the choice of most of the populace, and our laws were written to follow the Catholic church, and anyone NOT a catholic were "not quite as good as" the rest of the population, then I would consider this a theocracy.  Does that make sense?

 



Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)