As far as I am tracking there has been no evidence gathered to support the idea that religious people are any more well behaved or productive members of society.

This is just another collective illusion we all subscribe to. We think that most people think religious person=automatically good, or moral, when there is no evidence to support that claim, and a lot of evidence to support the opposite, that religious affiliation has nothing to do with being a decent human.

https://www.livescience.com/47799-mo...l-beliefs.html

https://newsroom.carleton.ca/story/religion-morality/

https://www.yahoo.com/video/religiou...170716231.html

https://www.sapiens.org/culture/religious-people-moral/

https://theconversation.com/amp/are-...re-moral-84560

https://www.wsj.com/articles/does-re...al-11650468288



People really just have egotistical moral superiority complex’s and it is mostly subconscious.

I am religious I want to believe I am better than other people. I am not, but I have this one thing that talks about values and being a decent human, so I am one. This means anyone else who does the same is a decent person.

here is a study that shows that concept to be accurate….

https://www.yahoo.com/video/religiou...170716231.html

It is a lie. Religious institutions are notorious for atrocities and covering them up. Religious people judge others unnecessarily.

All that bs “I am sad for your soul”, “I will pray for you”.

Get over yourself.

From the very first link





Amazing study you have there.


BRB - liberal reports someone to HR for “misgendering” someone and reports it as a moral act.


I agree that calling yourself religious doesn’t indicate what type of person you are or what you’ll do, but the more a person focuses on an honest relationship with God the more likely they are to make the world a better place imho. Obviously it’s possible to do that without turning to God, but turning to God helps. And it certainly helps on a societal scale. The closest we’ve seen to completely removing God would be the Asian countries like Japan(particularly WWII era), China, Koreas, etc. and I think most people would say there are tons of issues with them.

By the third and fourth centuries AD, it is proper to speak of a Greco-Roman tradition of thought. The Romans tried to limit the influence of Greek thought in the early days of the Empire. However, over time Greek ideas joined with Roman conceptions and a new tradition of thought was forged. In some respects, the Hellenistic world became Romanized. This is just one more example of how the Romans succeeded by assimilated other cultures. Furthermore, the Greco-Roman tradition refers as much to classical and Hellenistic Greece as it does the days of the Roman Republic and the Empire. Both civilizations produced a world view which we could only call pagan. This world view was secular through and through. Gods and goddesses were common to both civilizations and yet as time passed it was the virtuous life of the good citizen that was of supreme importance. The emphasis was on living the good life in the here and now, whether in the city state or the cosmopolis.

The Greco-Roman tradition was fashioned over the one thousand year history of the classical world, the world of Greece and Rome. The Renaissance of the 14th through 16th centuries attempted to revive the ideals of the classical world, and so the humanists of the Renaissance tried to imitate the humanism of centuries past. Humanist scholars took great pains to study the texts of the ancient world, not just to "harvest" the virtuous life of classical man, but to learn classical Greek and Latin. If ancient texts needed to be studied, then they needed to be studied in the language in which they were composed. What had happened between the fall of Rome and the Renaissance was the bastardization of classical languages. As scholars, the humanists needed the classical world for its language as much as it did for its ideas.

However, it was also during the age of the Pax Romana that this pagan tradition, this Greco-Roman tradition, was joined by another important tradition, by another world view. This world view is called the Judeo-Christian tradition. That is, the ethical and ordering principles of the Jewish and Christian faiths.

The Greco-Roman tradition was secular: it proposed no one God and formal religion as we know it today, did not exist. While the Greeks would pay homage to their many deities, as would the Romans, there is no doubt that they placed their true faith in the hands of man. In other words, humanism: man the thinker, man the doer, man the maker. For the Greeks, man was endowed with Reason, the capacity to think and use his intellect. This initially took the form of glorifying the city state: the city state was the world. Anything outside the city state was somehow inferior, barbarian. In an important respect such an attitude was narrow in focus and provided the Greeks with a tunnel vision that prevented them from further growth during the Hellenistic Age.

The Greeks were also obsessed with the personal cultivation of the individual. "Know thyself," repeated Socrates. The good man ought to seek the good life and so become a good citizen, a virtuous citizen. And a collection of virtuous citizens would constitute the virtuous city state. The only way that the good life was at all possible was through personal examination. Or, as Socrates again argued, "the unexamined life is not worth living."

Above all, the Greeks asked questions. What is knowledge? What is the state? What is beauty? What is virtue? What is justice? Was the best form of government? The Greeks, in the last analysis, were thinkers rather than doers. In time, the Greek world view came or to be based on the intellect more than it was on action. The best illustration of this world view -- a view of thought rather than of action-- was the Stoic and Epicurean therapies of the Hellenistic Age. These therapies taught resignation in the face of chaos and disorder -- they taught men to resign themselves in private reflection and thought.

The Romans, on the other hand, were doers, they were men of action. They succeeded in translating into action what the Greeks had only thought possible. The Romans also asked questions about the world, about nature, and about man. To be sure, they inhabited the same world as the Hellenistic Greeks. They understood and accepted the chaos and disorder of the world. However, they were clearly more prepared to develop their thought of the world in relation to what kind of world in which they wanted to live. The Romans also had the example of the Greeks and their history. In other words, the Romans were cognizant of what the Greeks had accomplished and not accomplished. The Greeks had no such history to which they could refer.

The end result for the Romans was that they managed to create their own world and they called it the Roman Empire. And their world view became embodied in a pagan cult. This cult was nothing less than the patriotic worship of Rome itself. And throughout the Empire we find the expression Genius Populi Romani celebrated by all Romans. If anything sustained the Empire, it was the conception of the "Genius of the Roman People." The Romans were taught to believe that the destiny of Rome was the destiny of the world and this became embodied in a civil religion which embraced the genius of the Roman people. This civil religion was a secular, pagan religion, in which all men devoted their energies toward public service to state. It was their duty to serve the state. It was virtuous. These duties consisted of service and responsibility because only through responsible service would one come to know virtue.

good thing I included six more.

But that is irrelevant.

Post one showing religion directly contribute to higher moral well being. So far that post you quoted is the only one that doesn’t contain pure personal opinion and conjecture.

If we remove the Bible as our anchor in society which tells us what is right and what is wrong, if morality hasn't been given to us from above but rather we've arrived at it from below through majority rules and consensus, wouldn't that mean that eventually every form of degeneracy will be acceptable? What's keeping us fixed at a certain understanding of morality without God?

Religions are historically too regional in nature to have a global unifying effect. They cause division between sects due to their differences in origin and story

We need the threat of aliens to unite us

Once the threat of aliens unites us, real or not, we will rely on our leaders to make the necessary decisions regarding social norms, morality, law and order for the entire earth

This is straight from the NWO playbook

My opinion is Common law is ingrained in nature to some extent. So no.

You have societies like prechrisitian Rome that were successful. What's the difference between virtues inspired by God and virtues inspired by Nature. One and the same.

When you have low IQ warlords, sometimes they only relate to religion.

God gave us reason, not religion. When you remove the fear and tribalism, most good people want the same things, and can unite for good. The powers that be divide through fear, its their favorite tool.

The seven deadly sins are inherently bad. Do you really need a pastor to tell you why stealing, adultry, murder, greed ect ect is wrong, or can you figure it out for yourself?

Christianity teaches us that we are all sinners and that we are born of sin.

Speak for yourself...that makes absolutely no sense.

Speak for yourself...that makes absolutely no sense.

of course it does. and we have the proof. As I've shown before, when the Bible and prayer was taken out of Public School, society immediately went to chit. Teen rape, drug use, lower test skills, drop out rate, pregnancy, STD's and even divorce all sky rocketed. Numbers don't lie.

Actually, all that stuff has gone down, not up. It seems like there's more of it because of social media, but there's less.

oh so you're not a sinner? You sit atop your throne judging all for their transgressions?

What ingrained them in the first place? God's law. People following Christianity. We no longer live as barbarians and have civilized societies directly because people adopted and operated on the morals given to us by God.

Maybe morals seem "common sense" to you, most likely because your parents or their parents passed down traditional societal values and boundaries, but those common sense morals are becoming less common with the hoards of people adopting the "do what thou wilt" lifestyle. Dissolution of boundaries is in direct correlation with people denying God's existence.

Why are you so against God's moral law having its place in society? Is it because if you acknowledged its legitimacy that you would then suddenly become responsible for your sins? Is your pornography and hedonism really that precious to you that you literally recoil at the suggestion that society operates better when Christian values are its foundation?

No, civilised societies existed before Christianity

# 1. Well I’m against it because it directly violates the constitution.

The Constitution clearly states every man has the right to liberty or the pursuit of happiness so long as he doesn’t not infringe on others rights.

Even though the constitution and Declaration of Independence where obviously written with a small amount of basis on religion by the language the founding fathers obviously believed in a secular nation and probably foresaw more people turning from faith as science advanced.

#2. Like some of the others posted to have a civilized society there needs to be a set of basic rules that you can’t deviate from. Things like ****philia , rape , murder , Theft , Gluttony are all wrong and no moral society would allow except maybe the the very last one.

America was founded on some religious morals correct but if anything that proves that it doesn’t mean **** because if you go to a lot of countries that weren’t founded or based on Christian values you’d see there actually more traditionally moral than us.

The best examples of this off the top of my head are Japan and S Korea. Safe communities , adulatory or cheating is heavily frowned upon , gay people are somewhat shunned even though as a community you don’t go out of your way to be rude or disrespectful to people. Porn is banned or heavily censored as well.

The type of super straightlaced society that you want doesn’t require Christianity but you’re probably so blinded by your religion you think that and blame the fall of “morals” on the erosion of faith in this country.

If we based laws on Christianity you really don’t think that could be corrupted and used as a means of controlling people ? The Catholic Church already did that once.


3. the more you push your beliefs on someone in a free society the less it actually works. That’s human nature. That’s why the hardcore left is losing constituents more and more since the 2016 election. The same goes for religion. This will never be a 100% Christian society unless you bring back stoning and execution of non believers.

The Bible literally says judgement is gods and gods alone. We all “sin” and a verse literally says how is a follower supposed to help remove a particle from his brothers eye when he has plank of wood stuck in his.

I think you know some of this but this is one of the only forums where a decent amount of the Republican or conservative voters are still religious and won’t laugh at you for saying such crazy **** so you post it here.

If you want to take a good look at religious law look no further than to the ****hole that is the Middle East. It’s working really well for them , huh ?

Allahu Akbar!

umm..no..

# 1. Well I’m against it because it directly violates the constitution.

The Constitution clearly states every man has the right to liberty or the pursuit of happiness so long as he doesn’t not infringe on others rights.

Even though the constitution and Declaration of Independence where obviously written with a small amount of basis on religion by the language the founding fathers obviously believed in a secular nation and probably foresaw more people turning from faith as science advanced.

#2. Like some of the others posted to have a civilized society there needs to be a set of basic rules that you can’t deviate from. Things like ****philia , rape , murder , Theft , Gluttony are all wrong and no moral society would allow except maybe the the very last one.

America was founded on some religious morals correct but if anything that proves that it doesn’t mean **** because if you go to a lot of countries that weren’t founded or based on Christian values you’d see there actually more traditionally moral than us.

The best examples of this off the top of my head are Japan and S Korea. Safe communities , adulatory or cheating is heavily frowned upon , gay people are somewhat shunned even though as a community you don’t go out of your way to be rude or disrespectful to people. Porn is banned or heavily censored as well.

The type of super straightlaced society that you want doesn’t require Christianity but you’re probably so blinded by your religion you think that and blame the fall of “morals” on the erosion of faith in this country.

If we based laws on Christianity you really don’t think that could be corrupted and used as a means of controlling people ? The Catholic Church already did that once.


3. the more you push your beliefs on someone in a free society the less it actually works. That’s human nature. That’s why the hardcore left is losing constituents more and more since the 2016 election. The same goes for religion. This will never be a 100% Christian society unless you bring back stoning and execution of non believers.

The Bible literally says judgement is gods and gods alone. We all “sin” and a verse literally says how is a follower supposed to help remove a particle from his brothers eye when he has plank of wood stuck in his.

I think you know some of this but this is one of the only forums where a decent amount of the Republican or conservative voters are still religious and won’t laugh at you for saying such crazy **** so you post it here.

If you want to take a good look at religious law look no further than to the ****hole that is the Middle East. It’s working really well for them , huh ?

Allahu Akbar!

The Bible tells us to judge..it literally states the same measure you use to judge, you will be judged as well..

Do not judge according to appearance but judge righteous judgment -John 7:24.

There is nothing in the Constitution regarding the separation of church and state. Seperation of Church & State was never in the Constitution. It was in a letter that Jefferson wrote to the Danberry Baptist Church in Connecticut because the church felt the first amendment was not strong enough to protect religious freedom. Jefferson assured them that the Constitution built a wall separating the church & State, meaning the State could not control the Church. It means the exact OPPOSITE of what you & many others misuse it for


In fact, every single state Constitution makes explicit references to God & religion.

I posted up above what happens to society when you remove God. When you take away the forceable punishment of eternal consequences, and teach a child they are nothing but animals, (literally) they will act accordingly..see society now.

BTW, everywhere Christianity has gone it has elevated women, everywhere it has not, they are thought of second class citizens, slightly above dogs.

So you're going to hell because you violate John 7:24. Go ahead and repeat your racist comments about blacks. I'll see you in hell buddy.

never made racist comments about blacks, my best friend since I was 8yrs old is black..are you fukin retarded?

Does he know what you post here?

China is pretty well ordered as a society and they don't have religious influence on the state as well.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...t-from-others/


On average, Americans who say they attend religious services weekly and pray daily also report being happier than those who are less religiously committed. Four-in-ten highly religious adults say they are generally “very happy,” compared with 29% of those who are less religious. Those who are not highly religious are somewhat more likely than the most devout to say they are “pretty happy” (54% vs. 46%) or “not too happy” (14% vs. 12%).
Highly religious Americans see their extended families more often. Nearly half (47%) say they do this at least once or twice a month, while only 30% of less religious adults get together with extended family as often. Americans who are not highly religious are twice as likely as those who are highly religious to say they seldom or never attend gatherings with extended family (31% vs. 16%).
Volunteerism and donations to the poor are especially common practices for those who are highly religious. Among people who pray daily and attend services weekly, 45% also say they volunteered in the past week (including 23% who did so mainly through a church or other religious organization). Just 28% of Americans who are not highly religious say they volunteered in the past seven days. The gap is even bigger when it comes to helping the poor: 65% of the highly religious say they donated money, time or goods to help the poor in the past week, compared with 41% of all other U.S. adults.