Religious people less intelligent than atheists?

[numan]

'

If I understand the sampling correctly, on the atheist side they're oversampling people with university degrees, graduate degrees & so on, while the religious side probably over-presents people with less formal education than the first set.

Yes, we certainly don't want the knowledge of the educated to be given more credence than the opinions of the ignorant !! · ·

"I'm all in favor of the democratic principle that one idiot is as good as one genius, but I draw the line when someone takes the next step and concludes that two idiots are better than one genius."
---Leo Szilard
.

 

[daveman]

'

If I understand the sampling correctly, on the atheist side they're oversampling people with university degrees, graduate degrees & so on, while the religious side probably over-presents people with less formal education than the first set.

Yes, we certainly don't want the knowledge of the educated to be given more credence than the opinions of the ignorant !! · ·

"I'm all in favor of the democratic principle that one idiot is as good as one genius, but I draw the line when someone takes the next step and concludes that two idiots are better than one genius."
---Leo Szilard
.

You're one of those people who confuse "educated" with "intelligent", aren't you?

 

[BreezeWood]

.

(Christian) people less intelligent than the (Religious) and atheist !



education has been the bane to Christianity throughout history and in this country where science has properly replaced biblical lore is an example of why.

Christians that are unwilling to "improve" their book just as the Islamist have only themselves to blame for their regressive intelligence.


it is a fallacy to believe a special relationship that mankind is created in the image of God more so than any other living creature.

.

 

[percysunshine]

.

(Christian) people less intelligent than the (Religious) and atheist !



education has been the bane to Christianity throughout history and in this country where science has properly replaced biblical lore is an example of why.

Christians that are unwilling to "improve" their book just as the Islamist have only themselves to blame for their regressive intelligence.


it is a fallacy to believe a special relationship that mankind is created in the image of God more so than any other living creature.

.

But what if you are wrong?

You die and go to meet St Peter at the pearly gates and he says "There is this little issue of that internet message board post you made. What are we going to do about that?"

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That has nothing to do with my question. Is anyone prohibiting you from displaying a religious symbol on personal property or speaking about your religion in public?

You ask if anyone is prohibiting the display of religious symbols on private property, I cite a case that is doing that, and you say it has nothing to do with your question.

Color me not surprised.

That is not private property.

It has been sold to private parties twice. Both times people went to court to have the cross removed anyway because they didn't get a chance to tear it down.

That more than counters your argument that no one is trying to remove religious symbols from private property because they clearly succeeded in doing so.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

.

(Christian) people less intelligent than the (Religious) and atheist !



education has been the bane to Christianity throughout history and in this country where science has properly replaced biblical lore is an example of why.

Christians that are unwilling to "improve" their book just as the Islamist have only themselves to blame for their regressive intelligence.


it is a fallacy to believe a special relationship that mankind is created in the image of God more so than any other living creature.

.

Interesting stab at proving you are dumber than the average idiot.

Should I point out that there was no need?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Islamic Jihadists, Christian far right reactionary literalists, and Jewish orthodox have many psychological traits in common, I suspect.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Islamic Jihadists, Christian far right reactionary literalists, and Jewish orthodox have many psychological traits in common, I suspect.

If that is based on the fact that every single one of them thinks you are a liar I would suggest to you that you might be the problem.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Now, now QWB, stop the melt, hmmm?

I bet you are a social con literalist on the far right, am I right?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Now, now QWB, stop the melt, hmmm?

I bet you are a social con literalist on the far right, am I right?

You don't even know what that means.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I do, actually, and so do you.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I do, actually, and so do you.

I know it means I am not a Republican, or a Democrat, which is all that matters.

 

[JakeStarkey]

So you are an independent, a free thinker, whatever.

 

[asterism]

Islamic Jihadists, Christian far right reactionary literalists, and Jewish orthodox have many psychological traits in common, I suspect.

Islamic jihadists believe in government control of all aspects of life. Freedom of religion is discouraged, central planning of the economy, state ownership of the means of production, and exceptions to the rules for those in positions of authority.

It doesn't sound like you know any Muslims. You've obviously never experienced life in a Muslim country.

 

[JakeStarkey]

asterism, jihadists apparently have much in common with Christian literalists. The difference is the can't get away with it here.

 

[asterism]

asterism, jihadists apparently have much in common with Christian literalists. The difference is the can't get away with it here.

You obviously don't know much about Islam.

Go ahead and try to make your case if you think you can.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I don't have to. The jihadist reactionaries make their bad case every day and every way.

 

[asterism]

I don't have to. The jihadist reactionaries make their bad case every day and every way.

You claim that they have much in common with Christian literalists. Show us some specifics of that, if you can.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No need. You can't.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Really?

Texas won a case where the 10 Commandments are displayed on the grounds of the capital in 2005.

The court ruled that displaying the nativity scene on public property was legal in Pawtucket in 1984.

Every single piece of US currency has the words "In God we Trust" on it.

Care to explain all of that given your declaration that all of those are illegal under any circumstances?

Maybe you should stop using bold font, it has rotter your brain.

By the way, care to tell me again that I only resort to insulting bold font when I cannot address the issues? Because I can clearly do both, unlike people who use bold font.

You're really wetting your panties over this, aren't you? Why don't you join Ernie S-hole in his war against the evil bold font. He is threatening to come back to the board every 48 hours to give me negative rep until he can again sleep knowing that the evil font has been defeated. The silly thing is that you are both alleged adults who are having a major meltdown over something as trivial as a FONT? REALLY? I think you 2 have control issues.

It's not a threat.

Report Ernie for neg rep stalking.