Study: Churchgoers Less Likely to Commit Crime

[TheGreatGatsby]

Then, of course, there would be no response!

But there will.

will be* -- You're a lazy poster in all senses.

And there's no 'of course' about it. I have never at any point said that I would never respond to your imbecilic posts.

 

[HenryBHough]

Isn't it amazing how my literary efforts elude even the most expensive "ignore" filters!

Again I must raise the question that set someone's tooth on edge:

Since churchgoing steers the weak-of-will from lives of crime then WHY do churches feel compelled to put padlocks on poor boxes?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Isn't it amazing how my literary efforts elude even the most expensive "ignore" filters!

Not sure what moronic point you're trying to make, exactly.

ISince churchgoing steers the weak-of-will from lives of crime then WHY do churches feel compelled to put padlocks on poor boxes?

Who said that church steers the weak-of-will from crime? That's your stupid, bias, misinformed recap. The study simply said that churchgoers are less likely to commit crime. They could be the strong-of-will in the first place. So, your labels are but a childish reflection of yourself.

Also, once again, you're a moron. The study does not state that church eradicates all crime. If a church has a padlock upon their 'poor boxes,' then perhaps they are acknowledging such a reality. Or perhaps, they are simply complying with the scripture, 'pray that ye avoid temptations.' Thus, there is actually an ecclesiastical justification for it even.

 

[HenryBHough]

OK, so we've demonstrated that most churches suffer from a lack of faith in the goodness of mankind. Had they faith then poorboxes would be open topped and all the good tableware would be kept on open shelves.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

OK, so we've demonstrated that most churches suffer from a lack of faith in the goodness of mankind. Had they faith then poorboxes would be open topped and all the good tableware would be kept on open shelves.

We have demonstrated no such thing. But what you have demonstrated is your willingness to callously brush over valid points. Furthermore, a lock box is a deterrent against criminals coming into the church. Maybe, you should come back to Earth and accept glaring realities. If you do so, you might even shed your coat of bigotry.

 

[HenryBHough]

Locked poor boxes are a symptom of grievous lack of faith having given way to prudence. Even the best padlock is only as effective as the most poorly constructed "ignore" function.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Locked poor boxes are a symptom of grievous lack of faith having given way to prudence. Even the best padlock is only as effective as the most poorly constructed "ignore" function.

You are unfit to judge anyone's level of faith. Furthermore, I already explained how it could be a function of their faith. It's one of those points you swept over.

 

[HenryBHough]

My faith in the ability of the faithful to make the ignore function work indeed has been shattered. And it IS prudent to lock the poor boxes because recent court cases involving clergy do suggest that statistics concerning the relative criminal propensities of churched and unchurched could use some improvement.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Unfit.

 

[bayoubill]

[Torn whether to post this in Religion or Law so posted it here instead]

CBNNews.com, Wednesday, February 12, 2014

A new study suggests that attending church cuts down on crime.

Researchers at Manchester University discovered that people who attend church on a regular basis are less likely to commit crimes.

Okay, so it's in Great Britain. But why doesn't it correlate with the USA? Anyhow, atheists and leftists will rant and rave that it's flawed and unreliable. But, check out the short piece @ Study: Churchgoers Less Likely to Commit Crime - World - CBN News - Christian News 24-7 - CBN.com

wow... sheep cause less problems than non-sheep...

watta shock... who'da thunk it...

did the government send out a few dumptrucks full of money for this study...?

'n was it then published in the scholarly journal "Duh"...?

 

[Esmeralda]

Study: Churchgoers Less Likely to Commit Crime

I can't speak for everyone, but as a churchgoer myself, I have faith in God. Having faith in God, implies that I need to follow his teachings and not get involved in crime.For many young ones, especially teenagers, attending church no doubt keeps them out of trouble. Having faith in God for many of these youngsters also translates to having faith in themselves, which ultimately results in staying out of trouble.

This is the thing that is just so totally illogical. One does not need to believe in God to have a set of morals and ethics that not only rival those of any religious body in the world, but do better than most of them. If you can't control yourself and need a big daddy to tell you what to do and implant in your mind the idea of a hell and punishment, that's your problem. I don't need a supreme being to scare me into behaving appropriately, to not be a criminal, to be a decent human being. Nearly all of the Christians and other very religious people I have ever known were complete hypocrites and did not do at all what their 'god' and their religion told them was the right thing to do. ~They pretended to do so, but often twisted the tenets of their religion to fit their own needs, or they just ignored them.

Believing and living by what one thinks is right is what good people do, whether they are religious or not. Believing in God and being a member of some religious group by no means insures people are better people. Those folks in churches may not be doing any discernable crime against the state, but I guarantee you they are doing all kinds of wrongs that no one knows about, against others. All kinds of moral wrongs. Many of the meanest, nastiest, cruelest, most vengeful and most false people I’ve ever known were religious people. Right now, my immediate supervisor is an absolutely wicked witch, a self promoting, lying, power hungry (and abusive with that power),manipulating witch who likes to get people fired and expects everyone to kiss her butt daily in order to avoid her wrath. And she is a Christian. And she is only one in a long, long line of Christians whom I’ve known and have been the same. If you need a big daddy to tell you to be good, so be it. Not everyone does. And those who do have one generally ignore what they are supposed to do anyway.

I will add that I don't have a particular thing about all religious people. If they really live by their religious beliefs that's great. I have known some of those too, but they are rare. I currently have another colleague who is a Mormon, from the UK surprisingly. She is a good person and lives by her beliefs. One of the best people I've ever known. I don't think all religious people are hypocrites.

As far as the study: the logic of it is completely flawed. Far more people don't go to church as those who go to church. Statistically, you would find far, far more people who don't go to church and also don't commit crimes. Those people don't need a church to tell them how to behave. It's a ridiculous study that proves virtually nothing. Millions more people who don't go to church also don't commit crimes, millions more than those who go to church and don't commit crimes. The study suggests, blatantly, that if you don't go to church, you are more likely to commit a crime. That's total BS.

 

[Noomi]

[Torn whether to post this in Religion or Law so posted it here instead]

CBNNews.com, Wednesday, February 12, 2014

A new study suggests that attending church cuts down on crime.

Researchers at Manchester University discovered that people who attend church on a regular basis are less likely to commit crimes.

Okay, so it's in Great Britain. But why doesn't it correlate with the USA? Anyhow, atheists and leftists will rant and rave that it's flawed and unreliable. But, check out the short piece @ Study: Churchgoers Less Likely to Commit Crime - World - CBN News - Christian News 24-7 - CBN.com

Catholic priests were obviously not included in this study.

 

[Esmeralda]

[Torn whether to post this in Religion or Law so posted it here instead]

CBNNews.com, Wednesday, February 12, 2014

A new study suggests that attending church cuts down on crime.

Researchers at Manchester University discovered that people who attend church on a regular basis are less likely to commit crimes.

Okay, so it's in Great Britain. But why doesn't it correlate with the USA? Anyhow, atheists and leftists will rant and rave that it's flawed and unreliable. But, check out the short piece @ Study: Churchgoers Less Likely to Commit Crime - World - CBN News - Christian News 24-7 - CBN.com

Catholic priests were obviously not included in this study.

Exactly!

 

[Jughead]

Right now, my immediate supervisor is an absolutely wicked witch, a self promoting, lying, power hungry (and abusive with that power),manipulating witch who likes to get people fired and expects everyone to kiss her butt daily in order to avoid her wrath.

I am sorry to hear about that Esmeralda. Hopefully upper management will realize that she is not a good fit for the company, and will replace her. Give it time, when her reputation gets out, she'll be gone.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Study: Churchgoers Less Likely to Commit Crime

I can't speak for everyone, but as a churchgoer myself, I have faith in God. Having faith in God, implies that I need to follow his teachings and not get involved in crime.For many young ones, especially teenagers, attending church no doubt keeps them out of trouble. Having faith in God for many of these youngsters also translates to having faith in themselves, which ultimately results in staying out of trouble.

This is the thing that is just so totally illogical. One does not need to believe in God to have a set of morals and ethics.....

What's illogical is your argument. JH did not state that non-believers don't have morals. He stated that a belief in God tends to create or augment morals. Therefore, in general, believers tend to be more moralistic then non-believers from his p.o.v. You can agree or disagree. But his argument is not illogical. Your rebuttal (that changed his premise) is illogical.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Well, it's kind of hard to get away with mugging the preacher in front of the entire congregation and get away with it...

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Well, it's kind of hard to get away with mugging the preacher in front of the entire congregation and get away with it...

For you, it's kind of hard to make a logical argument, apparently.

 

[Esmeralda]

I can't speak for everyone, but as a churchgoer myself, I have faith in God. Having faith in God, implies that I need to follow his teachings and not get involved in crime.For many young ones, especially teenagers, attending church no doubt keeps them out of trouble. Having faith in God for many of these youngsters also translates to having faith in themselves, which ultimately results in staying out of trouble.

This is the thing that is just so totally illogical. One does not need to believe in God to have a set of morals and ethics.....

What's illogical is your argument. JH did not state that non-believers don't have morals. He stated that a belief in God tends to create or augment morals. Therefore, in general, believers tend to be more moralistic then non-believers from his p.o.v. You can agree or disagree. But his argument is not illogical. Your rebuttal (that changed his premise) is illogical.

Gatsby, your ability to think logically is nil. I've known that for a long time. Do you even understand the theme of the novel whose title you use as your name? Do you even know or understand the novel? I very much doubt it.

The fact is that the vast majority of non-church goers also do not commit crimes. The study the OP cites suggests that going to church means you are less likely to commit a crime. That is not so. The study is flawed. But you can't see it because you are unable to think logically.

It's BS also that being a 'believer' tends to make one more moral. It's a lie. A lie you all tell yourselves. Religious people are just as likely, often more likely, to do terrible things, often in the name of religion. Jesus H. Christ, your worst crime is your unadulterated and misplaced self-righteousness.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Great,
Whats the matter? Nobody send you a valentine?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

This is the thing that is just so totally illogical. One does not need to believe in God to have a set of morals and ethics.....

What's illogical is your argument. JH did not state that non-believers don't have morals. He stated that a belief in God tends to create or augment morals. Therefore, in general, believers tend to be more moralistic then non-believers from his p.o.v. You can agree or disagree. But his argument is not illogical. Your rebuttal (that changed his premise) is illogical.

Gatsby, your ability to think logically is nil. I've known that for a long time. Do you even understand the theme of the novel whose title you use as your name? Do you even know or understand the novel? I very much doubt it.

The fact is that the vast majority of non-church goers also do not commit crimes. The study the OP cites suggests that going to church means you are less likely to commit a crime. That is not so. The study is flawed. But you can't see it because you are unable to think logically.

What illogical claim did I make? I defy you to tell me such a thing. Logic has real rigors. It's not some subjective concept. You changing the poster's premise as a means of argumentation is indeed illogical. You coming back and making your trite personal attacks does not change that fact.

Now then, moving onto your new (illogical) argument. Even if the 'vast majority' of non-believers don't commit crime, that doesn't disprove the study. Indeed, both groups can have a vast majority who do not commit crime. And in such an event, the religious people can still commit less crime. Thus the study is not "flawed" for the reasons you state.

Oh, the juicy irony of your ending statement, "But you can't see it because you are unable to think logically." And for that matter, your opening statement, "Gatsby, your ability to think logically is nil."

Yum, Yum, Yum. Juicy irony.