Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
In reply to the discussion: Religion turns children into assholes [View all]guillaumeb
(42,649 posts)26. My reply:
I am comparing citizens as a mass versus individuals acting as individuals. But every mass of citizens is composed of individuals, so the macro reflects, to some degree, the individual.
But China is an excellent example of a country with no real history of theism, save that imposed by European colonialists. And this country, these mainly non-theistic citizens, comprise a Government that behaves every bit as brutally as the worst of the theistic countries.
Your examples of Saudi Arabia and Iran well illustrate how badly theists can behave. As does most of history, for that matter.
As to the charge of "demonizing atheism", I have no such intent. Nor, as another poster has insisted, do I "hate atheists".
Atheism is a position that I do not share. I do not sat it is a bad position, or that people who share it are bad people. I simply do not share the position.
But China is an excellent example of a country with no real history of theism, save that imposed by European colonialists. And this country, these mainly non-theistic citizens, comprise a Government that behaves every bit as brutally as the worst of the theistic countries.
Your examples of Saudi Arabia and Iran well illustrate how badly theists can behave. As does most of history, for that matter.
As to the charge of "demonizing atheism", I have no such intent. Nor, as another poster has insisted, do I "hate atheists".
Atheism is a position that I do not share. I do not sat it is a bad position, or that people who share it are bad people. I simply do not share the position.
You focused on 1 aspect, and ignored the others. And I find it interesting that you introduced this study, this "soft science", after attacking the soft sciences.
Was it because this soft science study supports what you already believe?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
76 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
That's a major part of the paper - that parental reporting doesn't reflect an objective measure
muriel_volestrangler
Feb 2019
#68
This forum is open to all. No "safe space" here, though you clearly wish it were.
trotsky
Feb 2019
#69