This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="kingkong0124"] Religion keeps people in check. You can't deny this. Some people can't handle free will. Look at Somalia. kingkong0124
Somalia has no government, but they very much are religious.. There goes your theory..
Really, is Somalia really that religious? Since when? and that's not the religion I was referring to when I said that.. Not sure you understand this but the majority of the world are religious.. And the countries with the greatest % of religious believers are in fact 3rd world countries.. IN WHICH Somalia is.. You said religion in general keeps people in check, we have a history full of such events that pretty much shows that you are in fact talking out of your ass..[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="kingkong0124"] Religion keeps people in check. You can't deny this. Some people can't handle free will. Look at Somalia. kingkong0124
Somalia has no government, but they very much are religious.. There goes your theory..
Really, is Somalia really that religious? Since when? and that's not the religion I was referring to when I said that..Most Somalis are Muslim. And you said religion keeps people in check. If that were the case than Somilia wouldn't be in the state it's in now.
[QUOTE="kingkong0124"]
Expected, I'm done here , not dealing with this tonight.
worlock77
Translation - "I've been proven wrong so now I'm tucking out of the thread."
Somalia is Muslim. Not Christian. I was referring to Christianity. Sorry.[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="kingkong0124"]
Expected, I'm done here , not dealing with this tonight.
kingkong0124
Translation - "I've been proven wrong so now I'm tucking out of the thread."
Somalia is Muslim. Not Christian. I was referring to Christianity. Sorry. Wouldn't make a difference either way.[QUOTE="kingkong0124"][QUOTE="worlock77"]Somalia is Muslim. Not Christian. I was referring to Christianity. Sorry. Wouldn't make a difference either way. Yes it would. Compare the U.S. (Christian country) and Iran.Translation - "I've been proven wrong so now I'm tucking out of the thread."
l4dak47
[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="kingkong0124"]
Expected, I'm done here , not dealing with this tonight.
kingkong0124
Translation - "I've been proven wrong so now I'm tucking out of the thread."
Somalia is Muslim. Not Christian. I was referring to Christianity. Sorry.No. You said religion. Not "Christianity, "religion".
[QUOTE="l4dak47"][QUOTE="kingkong0124"] Yes it would. Compare the U.S. (Christian country) and Iran. kingkong0124Bad comparison. Iran doesn't go around invading nations all willy nilly and killing thousands of innocent civilians in the process while also passing the NDAA and the Patriot act which is slowly eliminating our rights. Iran is 20x more authoritarian than Obama...ever heard of the Kurds by the way?
And what does that have to do with "religion keeps people in check"? Or are you just trying to deflect now?
Iran is 20x more authoritarian than Obama...ever heard of the Kurds by the way?[QUOTE="kingkong0124"][QUOTE="l4dak47"] Bad comparison. Iran doesn't go around invading nations all willy nilly and killing thousands of innocent civilians in the process while also passing the NDAA and the Patriot act which is slowly eliminating our rights. worlock77
And what does that have to do with "religion keeps people in check"? Or are you just trying to deflect now?
look at my post above. I listed examples supporting my theory.[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="kingkong0124"] Iran is 20x more authoritarian than Obama...ever heard of the Kurds by the way?kingkong0124
And what does that have to do with "religion keeps people in check"? Or are you just trying to deflect now?
look at my post above. I listed examples supporting my theory.And those seem like totally non-biased sources with no agenda at all, especially the one called "Athiest Watch". At any rate what does Iran have to do with "religion keeps people in check"?
look at my post above. I listed examples supporting my theory.[QUOTE="kingkong0124"][QUOTE="worlock77"]
And what does that have to do with "religion keeps people in check"? Or are you just trying to deflect now?
worlock77
And those seem like totally non-biased sources with no agenda at all, especially the one called "Athiest Watch".
Notice how the actual study is linked in the website to a .pdf file...the blog is just giving an opinion on the matter.1-i see not study. 2- "The data provide fodder for both sides. On the one hand, religious Americans are somewhat less tolerant of free speech and dissent. As just one example, in our survey we asked Americans whether someone should be allowed to give a speech defending Osama bin Laden or al-Qaeda. While most Americans said yes we are indeed a tolerant people religious Americans were slightly less likely to say so." 3 and 4 is biased.Looks like I'm right.
case 1,2,3,4
kingkong0124
look at my post above. I listed examples supporting my theory.[QUOTE="kingkong0124"][QUOTE="worlock77"]
And what does that have to do with "religion keeps people in check"? Or are you just trying to deflect now?
worlock77
And those seem like totally non-biased sources with no agenda at all, especially the one called "Athiest Watch". At any rate what does Iran have to do with "religion keeps people in check"?
Nothing. Sorry for bringing it up. Forgive me. Anywho, I think the sources I listed above are more than enough evidence to support that religion generally keeps people in check when compared to atheism.[QUOTE="kingkong0124"]1-i see not study. 2- "The data provide fodder for both sides. On the one hand, religious Americans are somewhat less tolerant of free speech and dissent. As just one example, in our survey we asked Americans whether someone should be allowed to give a speech defending Osama bin Laden or al-Qaeda. While most Americans said yes we are indeed a tolerant people religious Americans were slightly less likely to say so." 3 and 4 is biased. 1 is a study...and notice the word "slightly"...also, Explain to me how 3 and 4 are biased. 4 links to .pdf file about the study by the way....Looks like I'm right.
case 1,2,3,4
l4dak47
[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="kingkong0124"] look at my post above. I listed examples supporting my theory. kingkong0124
And those seem like totally non-biased sources with no agenda at all, especially the one called "Athiest Watch". At any rate what does Iran have to do with "religion keeps people in check"?
Nothing. Sorry for bringing it up. Forgive me. Anywho, I think the sources I listed above are more than enough evidence to support that religion generally keeps people in check when compared to atheism.Of course you think that. It supports your belief. It's called "confirmation bias".
[QUOTE="l4dak47"][QUOTE="kingkong0124"]1-i see not study. 2- "The data provide fodder for both sides. On the one hand, religious Americans are somewhat less tolerant of free speech and dissent. As just one example, in our survey we asked Americans whether someone should be allowed to give a speech defending Osama bin Laden or al-Qaeda. While most Americans said yes we are indeed a tolerant people religious Americans were slightly less likely to say so." 3 and 4 is biased. 1 is a study...and notice the word "slightly"...also, Explain to me how 3 and 4 are biased. 4 links to .pdf file about the study by the way.... 3 is irrelevant. I clicked on the link in the fourth one and it took me to a page saying the item does not exist or has been deleted.Looks like I'm right.
case 1,2,3,4
kingkong0124
More cool studies.
1
This one surprised me. You're 3x more likely to be alive if you are having a serious cardiac surgery.
2
"One of the most significant differences between active-faith and no-faith Americans is the cultural disengagement and sense of independence exhibited by atheists and agnostics in many areas of life. They are less likely than active-faith Americans to be registered to vote (78% versus 89%), to volunteer to help a non-church-related non-profit (20% versus 30%), to describe themselves as "active in the community" (41% versus 68%), and to personally help or serve a homeless or poor person (41% versus 61%). They are also more likely to be registered to vote as an independent or with a non-mainstream political party."
"One of the outcomes of this profile - and one of the least favorable points of comparison for atheist and agnostic adults - is the paltry amount of money they donate to charitable causes. The typical no-faith American donated just $200 in 2006, which is more than seven times less than the amount contributed by the prototypical active-faith adult ($1500). Even when church-based giving is subtracted from the equation, active-faith adults donated twice as many dollars last year as did atheists and agnostics. In fact, while just 7% of active-faith adults failed to contribute any personal funds in 2006, that compares with 22% among the no-faith adults."
[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="kingkong0124"] Women, more specifically atheist women, will not work as hard because they know they can always fall back on this if necessary. kingkong0124
Uh-huh, because atheists are lazy good for nothings with no sense of personal morals, vaules or work ethic right?
Religion keeps people in check. You can't deny this. Some people can't handle free will. Look at Somalia. Small government with pro capitalism policies? WHERE DO I SIGN UP??[QUOTE="kingkong0124"][QUOTE="worlock77"]Religion keeps people in check. You can't deny this. Some people can't handle free will. Look at Somalia. Small government with pro capitalism policies? WHERE DO I SIGN UP?? You're a libertarian, you love this, correct? No need to be sarcastic. Or did you switch to communism again last night?Uh-huh, because atheists are lazy good for nothings with no sense of personal morals, vaules or work ethic right?
DroidPhysX
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi I said "religion keeps people in check". I supported it with evidence. How did I not address the issue?[QUOTE="kingkong0124"]
More cool studies.
1
2
VanHelsingBoA64
[QUOTE="GrindingAxe"][QUOTE="FMAB_GTO"]Kids might be affected badly by it. We would see like,I dunno,5 years old prostitutes?FMAB_GTOI think people are assuming adult prostitutes in this hypothetical situation since legalizing it in the US would probably require an age limit. Im thinking 21.... oh. Well kids are sneaky =P I dunno I assumed it would be like online porn with no parent protection or something.
Here's $30, now do a dance
It makes women seem as though they are objects, which I'm strongly against, and lowers the productivity of many women. Not to mention the many marital problems it will ultimately cause.
kingkong0124
you talk about it like its rape
Definitely don't think the government should have control over our bodies...Aquat1cF1sh
so is that a yes or a no?
[QUOTE="kingkong0124"]
It makes women seem as though they are objects, which I'm strongly against, and lowers the productivity of many women. Not to mention the many marital problems it will ultimately cause.
sexyweapons
you talk about it like its rape
That's because he's an idiot
Prostitution should be legal
No.GazaAli
and your reason?
let me guess your a woman who thinks its disgusting and thats simply why you said no and you don't even a have a descent excuse for your it
Didn't we have a topic on this before? lol But its not legal idk i mean porn is legal so why not prostitution? AussieePet
:shock:did a girl just agree with me that prostitution should be legal?
[QUOTE="sexyweapons"]
[QUOTE="kingkong0124"]
It makes women seem as though they are objects, which I'm strongly against, and lowers the productivity of many women. Not to mention the many marital problems it will ultimately cause.
Bane_09
you talk about it like its rape
That's because he's an idiot
Prostitution should be legal
<
comes back from a thead in which people say Muslims are backwards.......then comes and looks what people are debating about in this thread. :lol:
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment