4 ms·

> That's a nice thought, but do you have any evidence to back this up? Do you have any evidence to back up your claim in the OP? > The notion that religious p

> That's a nice thought, but do you have any evidence to back this up? Do you have any evidence to back up your claim in the OP? > The notion that religious people are less likely to do bad things is highly problematic, objectively and logically. What exactly do you mean by “highly problematic, objectively and logically”? > People should not need to subscribe to a paranormal belief system to understand that theft, rape and murder are bad. “Should not” and “do not” are two very different things.

peteforde 8y ago
Evidence, no. I haven't done that particular research. However, I do spend a lot of time in conversation with my best friend - who is a late-convert Christian - about the distressingly common phenomena of people who call themselves Christians because it flatters them, but don't actually participate or behave in the way they are supposed to. You know, like the POTUS. I do happen to believe that religious people shouldn't assume that they act better than non-religious people. We all have to draw personal lines somewhere.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  Yes, 'converts'. That's a whole different story. Someone who is a 'huge believer' is utterly something different from someone who was born and raised Jewish, or Anglican and was raised that way. Growing up Jewish/Catholic is mostly a matter of culture, tradition, community, it actually has less to do with faith. That's why I focused on 'attendance'. They tend to be small-c conservative: normal jobs, kids attend school regularly, don't do drugs, eat reasonably well, vote, take out the garbage, stable family etc. etc.. 'Converts' are a whole other issue because ironically people who grow up in a regular faith aren't likely to convert to much at all. Seekers, people who are emotional about stuff, people who have had major tragedies, drug problems, who had major family problems, maybe lived on the street ... those 'new beginning' people are often the most outwardly 'believing' but they represent a totally different cohort of behaviours. The guy who was abused by his parents, lived on the street and smocked crack and then 'saw the light' and is a 'true believer' - this guy is going to bring most of his broken habits with him. This guy is not Ned Flanders. The other issues is type of religion: Evangelicalism is kind of like a 'Church of Converts' - they are 'living in faith' type thing. The type who mostly watch 'Church on TV'. This is not the camp of people I mean. Again this is not about how someone outwardly talks about / believes in Jesus or whatever. Old-school, traditional, mainline Churches are full of boring, very conscientious, small-c conservative people. This is my point. I'm not saying so much it's about faith per say, although that's probably related.

peteforde 8y ago

Evidence, no. I haven't done that particular research. However, I do spend a lot of time in conversation with my best friend - who is a late-convert Christian - about the distressingly common phenomena of people who call themselves Christians because it flatters them, but don't actually participate or behave in the way they are supposed to. You know, like the POTUS. I do happen to believe that religious people shouldn't assume that they act better than non-religious people. We all have to draw personal lines somewhere.

sonnyblarney 8y ago
Yes, 'converts'. That's a whole different story. Someone who is a 'huge believer' is utterly something different from someone who was born and raised Jewish, or Anglican and was raised that way. Growing up Jewish/Catholic is mostly a matter of culture, tradition, community, it actually has less to do with faith. That's why I focused on 'attendance'. They tend to be small-c conservative: normal jobs, kids attend school regularly, don't do drugs, eat reasonably well, vote, take out the garbage, stable family etc. etc.. 'Converts' are a whole other issue because ironically people who grow up in a regular faith aren't likely to convert to much at all. Seekers, people who are emotional about stuff, people who have had major tragedies, drug problems, who had major family problems, maybe lived on the street ... those 'new beginning' people are often the most outwardly 'believing' but they represent a totally different cohort of behaviours. The guy who was abused by his parents, lived on the street and smocked crack and then 'saw the light' and is a 'true believer' - this guy is going to bring most of his broken habits with him. This guy is not Ned Flanders. The other issues is type of religion: Evangelicalism is kind of like a 'Church of Converts' - they are 'living in faith' type thing. The type who mostly watch 'Church on TV'. This is not the camp of people I mean. Again this is not about how someone outwardly talks about / believes in Jesus or whatever. Old-school, traditional, mainline Churches are full of boring, very conscientious, small-c conservative people. This is my point. I'm not saying so much it's about faith per say, although that's probably related.