Why are Muslim Men so (Jew, prayer, atheist, human)

[modernist1]

...

[cupper3]

Originally Posted by godofthunder9010

"Religion is the opiate of the masses." -- Karl Marx. Every significant Marxist nation took those words to heart and sought to eliminate religion. People of faith were always always second class citizens.

Yes Marxism's first focus is about the redistribution of wealth. Marxism also targets elements in society that prevent the equalization of wealth. At the top of the list are the ultra rich and aristocracy. But if you know anything about Marx, you know that he viewed religion as an institution that kept the poor down and the aristocracy wealthy and powerful. He believed that the eradication of religion was an essential step in establishing his ideal world.

The trouble is, religious folks tend to be quite stubborn. The Communist governments all eventually gave up on wiping out religion. It was just too much trouble.

Some communist governments (Cuba) were not as vociferous as the Stalin government was in opposing religion. As Napoleon so famously once said, "“Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet.”

Religion has produced some unbelievably good people. Mother Theresa and Gandhi are good examples.

Ghandi famously said:" 'I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.' " Considering what one reads here, I must agree with his sentiment.

I think you picked the wrong person as "good" if you picked Mother Theresa. She was a horrible person, who raised money for her churches, but spent very little of it on those poor dying people she supposedly was to help. She was a fraud the world bought into. Were you not aware of those issues?

"The sick must suffer like christ on the cross" was her retort why none of the millions that she raised was spent on hospices, but instead on convents. She controlled millions of donations in secret bank accounts, some of that money from dubious sources like dictator Duvalier of Haiti.

Here is the University of Montreal report.

Mother Teresa: Anything but a saint…

An article about that study:

Mother Teresa Humanitarian Image A 'Myth,' New Study Says


This is what is said about her hospices, as opposed to where she got her treatments:

According to the study, the doctors observed a significant lack of hygiene, even unfit conditions and a shortage of actual care, food and painkillers. They say that the problem was not a paucity of funds as the Order of the Missionaries of Charity successfully raised hundreds of millions of dollars. Researchers said that when it came to her own treatment, "she received it in a modern American hospital".

She was a horrible fraud. Please educate yourself about her. She was anything but a saint.

Read what those closest to the source have to say, Indians:

"India has no reason to be grateful to Mother Teresa"* by Sanal Edamaruku

Your example is a huge fail.

Religion gave us every governmental system but Marxism.

You may want to rethink that. Religion did all it could do to STOP democracy, in fact, during the Middle Ages, with out the Pope's blessings, a king could not even rule his own country.

Religion played such an integral role in history that one cannot separate history and religion.

True, and for the most part people suffered because of it.

Religion gives people something better to hope for. A reason to stay positive in a world and life that is pretty depressing, disappointing and monotonous.

We all are aware of delusional mental patients who hear voices and think some godly creature is talking to them who are pretty happy. Besides which, I am not religious, and I have lots to hope for. Obviously you think people are the cup being half empty. Me, I see it the other way, even when I have had significant challenges.

For me personally, a relationship with God makes my life complete. It drives me to become a better person. To constantly improve. Countless people turn to religion when they are trying to drastically change their life for the better and the success rate is surprisingly high. Religion keeps us grounded. Left to themselves, humans tend to devolve into countless scenarios similar to Lord of the Flies. Good and decent people can turn into real monsters quite often. Religion pulls us in the opposite direction from that. It does more than just teach good moral behavior, it gives us a bigger reason for living by a code of good morals and ethics.

Religion is irrelevant to morals.

"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." Steven Weinberg.

Truer words were never spoken.

Human nature and selfish greed create institution like slavery. Religion is always pushing in the opposite direction. It produces great men who fight against such evils and eventual destroys them.

Have you read your bible? Do you know what it says about slavery, both in the old and new testament? How to beat your slaves. Jesus even said that. Jesus did not say don't have slaves, Jesus preached on how to beat them.

Oh, and there is nothing in the OT or NT against rape, child molestation or domestic abuse either. Some religion, huh?

The more that America has turned it's back on religion and God, the more we've devolved. Cheating in school, people who shoplift just for thrills, serial rapists and murders, gangs running rampant and a whole lot of bad behavior across the board. All such things have escalated to levels never dreamed of 100 years ago. Bad people doing bad things -- all of that did exist before certainly, but on a much, much smaller scale.

You DO realize that the violent crime rate is only a percentage of what it was 50 years ago, right? Funny how that coincides with the decline in being religious.

Ultimately it's pointless to answer your question because you'll have some way of spinning things around to make religion the boogey man. I answered you anyways since you seemed so insistent.

Well, I appreciate your attempt. Seriously, at least you tried. I hope I at least brought some new facts to the forefront for you to consider. These are not opinions, but factual information. Whether you accept them is up to you.

[godofthunder9010]

Nice graph on violent crime. Here's another one:



How you spin the rise and fall of violent crimes in the USA is extremely dependent upon what start-date you use. Violent crime was much lower in 1960 than it is today. So does a move away from religion equate to less violent crime??

There's lots of ways to spin this stuff. Here's another example:



If you would like to create a thread to discuss this further, I'm game. But I think we're effectively hijacked this thread and need to stop.

[cupper3]

Originally Posted by godofthunder9010

Nice graph on violent crime. Here's another one:



How you spin the rise and fall of violent crimes in the USA is extremely dependent upon what start-date you use. Violent crime was much lower in 1960 than it is today. So does a move away from religion equate to less violent crime??

There's lots of ways to spin this stuff. Here's another example:



If you would like to create a thread to discuss this further, I'm game. But I think we're effectively hijacked this thread and need to stop.

I was tying in your comment that decline in religion increased crime. BTW, your charts are not showing the source, whereas mine did, and it was not "estimated" as your first one suggests. It truly helps to source information from credible sources.

One can find that religion has little to do with the rise and fall in violent crime. Demographics are much more important, and it matches the coming of age of baby boomers, and declines as that group ages.

Religion, once again, is irrelevant.

[Jim_a49]

A major factor in violent crime is the persons race, though it is like Islam, where it is not politically correct to address the actual issue.

[cupper3]

Originally Posted by Jim_a49

A major factor in violent crime is the persons race, though it is like Islam, where it is not politically correct to address the actual issue.

I wonder if that was what was said when the Irish gangs were a major cause of violence in New York in the 1800's?

Oh, whoooops, they were white, were they not?

[Jim_a49]

Originally Posted by cupper3

I wonder if that was what was said when the Irish gangs were a major cause of violence in New York in the 1800's?

Oh, whoooops, they were white, were they not?

Actually it was, but it was ethnics, not race.

[Jim_a49]

It also applied to Italians, or Dagos.

[kinkytoes]

Originally Posted by godofthunder9010

Nice graph on violent crime. Here's another one:



How you spin the rise and fall of violent crimes in the USA is extremely dependent upon what start-date you use. Violent crime was much lower in 1960 than it is today. So does a move away from religion equate to less violent crime??

There's lots of ways to spin this stuff. Here's another example:



If you would like to create a thread to discuss this further, I'm game. But I think we're effectively hijacked this thread and need to stop.

Love your chart! The only minor issue with these statistics is that there may be discrepancies with the reporting of violent crimes...but if there is enough data, it may not matter. Look at what Prohibition has done to the rates of violence. Drugs are bad. At least for addicts, just like alcohol is for alcoholics. It is time to stop living in a nanny state, treat the addicts and decriminalize drugs.

[cupper3]

Originally Posted by kinkytoes

Love your chart! The only minor issue with these statistics is that there may be discrepancies with the reporting of violent crimes...but if there is enough data, it may not matter. Look at what Prohibition has done to the rates of violence. Drugs are bad. At least for addicts, just like alcohol is for alcoholics. It is time to stop living in a nanny state, treat the addicts and decriminalize drugs.

He still has not given us where the source data came from, even though asked. That is either avoiding the response, or worse, is being purposefully deceitful.