SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Bill Jackson who wrote (151995)6/10/2001 12:20:32 AM
From: cAPSLOCK  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
Lets face it, if the god you believe in existed and felt like you then there would be zero abortion. That means he does not exist or he beileves in abortion and you are wrong.

What an interesting two dimensional world you live in. Let's face it.. we should be glad that you (or I for that matter) are not God with that sort of dictatorial bent. ;)

Frankly the whole concept of a god is suh a totally flawed concept that is has to be false. 5% of the USA believes in god if you countchurch attendance. If you ask them about 70% believes due to pervasive social pressures.

So you are saying that if enough people believe in something it becomes real?? Ah no... you are saying that if enough people do NOT believe or believe for a bad reason (in YOUR estimation) then a thing cannot exist.

That is strange logic you know.

In some countries these socal pressures are far more powerful, Afghanistan for one, with religious police enforcing the fraud in fear of it being overthrown.

OK.. now you are saying this: People do stupid trhings in the name of God therefore God does not exist.

Hmm.

Look man. If you plan on beaing a rational athiest you have a long way to go. If you plan on revealing to strangers that you are angry at those who belive in God (or actually at God himself) then you are doing a good job.

Just my $1.50
cAPS



To: Bill Jackson who wrote (151995)6/10/2001 7:17:29 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
It is preferable to argue on a factual basis:

POLL RELEASES
March 29, 2001
Americans More Religious Now Than Ten Years Ago, but Less So Than in 1950s and 1960s
Americans most religious in 1956, least religious in 1993

by George Gallup Jr.

GALLUP NEWS SERVICE

PRINCETON, NJ -- The latest Gallup Index of Leading Religious Indicators (also called the Princeton Religion Research Index) remains at a relatively high level, but is far below the figures recorded in the 1950s and early 1960s.

The current Index (based on surveys conducted in 2000) matches the 1999 figure in this annual audit of the health of organized religion that has been measured for six decades. The latest figure is, however, 24 points higher than the Index’s lowest level, which was recorded in 1993.

The Index is an ongoing measurement of eight key religious beliefs and practices. These include the importance Americans place on religion; church or synagogue membership; weekly attendance at religious services; confidence in organized religion; the percentage who give a religious preference; the proportion who say religion can answer the problems of the day; belief in God; and finally, belief in the honesty and standards of the clergy.

Currently, the Index stands at 673. A perfect score would be 1,000 -- an obviously unattainable goal that could be reached only if there were total commitment to God and church.

While this Gallup Index of Leading Religious Indicators can be considered to be a reliable monitor of the strength of organized religion in America, it tells us less about the depth of religious faith, or the extent to which faith is lived out in behavior, attitudes and lifestyle. Continuous efforts by Gallup and other research organizations are being undertaken to probe the latter dimensions.

The decade of the 1980s saw a slow downtrend in the Index that hit its lowest levels in the late ’80s and early ’90s -- bottoming out in 1993, and then increasing in the latter part of the 1990s.

The highest point in this Index (which dates back to 1941) was attained during the 1950s. The Index peaked at 746 in 1956, before the social upheavals of the 1960s and 1970s took their toll on most institutions, including religion.

Trends of Individual Items
The relative consistency of the Index over the last few years reflects the stability of certain of the individual items.

The Constants
The "constants" that show relatively little change over the decades are these five items:

Belief in God or a universal spirit. This percentage has been very high in the U.S. over the last six decades -- consistently in the mid-90% range. However, considerably fewer (eight in 10) believe in a personal God, that is, a God who watches over humankind and answers prayers. And even fewer of these believers, six in 10, express complete trust in God.
Importance of religion in lives. Throughout the ’90s and into the year 2000, six in 10 Americans have claimed that religion is "very important" in their lives. In a half-century of measurement, this figure has never dropped below 50%. The highest percentage (75%) was recorded in 1952; the lowest (52%) in 1978.
Membership in churches and other faith communities. Gallup has been questioning people since 1937 on whether or not they are now members of a church or synagogue. Claims of membership have ranged from a high of 76%, recorded in both 1943 and 1947, to a low of 65% recorded in 1988 and again in 1990.
It is important to bear in mind that these percentages are based on those who identify themselves as church or synagogue members and who may or may not be on the official rolls of a given church.

Weekly worship attendance. Churchgoing, statistically speaking, has been fairly stable on the whole since Gallup started this measurement in 1939. In that year 41% of the adult population attended church on a weekly basis. The high point was recorded in the mid and late 1950s when nearly half (49%) of the adult population in a typical week attended church or synagogue.
Religious preference. Since 1947, approximately nine in 10 Americans have consistently given a religious preference. The percentage of Protestants and Jews has declined sharply since then, while the percentage of Catholics has remained at approximately the same level. Paralleling these trends has been a growth in the percentage of those who name other religions, or do not give a preference.
The Variables
The three "variables" are the following:

Confidence in organized religion. Confidence in the church or "organized religion" remained steady for many years, but suffered in the wake of the scandals in the late 1980s, when the percentage who said they had a "great deal" or "quite a lot" of confidence dropped from 66% in 1985 to just 52% in 1989. Confidence in organized religion has ranked consistently among the highest scores for the professions or fields tested over the years.
Ethics of clergy. Similarly, members of the clergy have not been immune to the effects of adverse publicity, as positive ratings of their honesty and ethics dropped from 67 percent to 55 percent between 1985 and 1989. While the clergy’s ethics and honesty scores have consistently been among the highest of any profession or field tested, with six in 10 in recent years giving them a "very high" or "high" rating, the figures have been volatile. The high point was recorded in 1985 (67%) and the low point (53%) in 1993.
Relevance of religion in today’s society. Views on the ability of religion to answer today’s problems have ranged widely over the decades, from a high of 81 percent in 1957 to a low of 56 percent in 1984, but a consistent majority over the years has believed in its relevance.
A perfect Index score of 1,000 would be achieved only when all people interviewed

Believed in God
Had a stated religious preference
Were members of a church or synagogue
Attended religious services during the previous 7 days
Considered religion very important in their lives
Had high confidence in organized religion
Believed religion answers today’s problems
Gave a high rating to ethical standards of clergy
Survey data for each of the eight items in a given year are added together, and are reported to the tenth decimal place. Here are the findings for each item for the year 2000, with approximate sample sizes:



1. Believe in God (1,000 cases)
95.0%

2. State a religious preference (2,043)
92.0

3. Member of a church (2,043)
68.2

4. Attended church in last 7 days (2,043)
43.6

5. Religion very important in life (2,043)
58.7

6. Religion answers problems (2,043)
64.9

7. High confidence in organized religion (1,000)
56.2

8. Give high rating to ethical standards of clergy (1,000)
59.5


TOTAL
538.1 (or 5381)


5381 divided by 8 = 673 (Index figure for 2000)



gallup.com



To: Bill Jackson who wrote (151995)6/10/2001 7:22:30 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
From another thread:

The strongest argument against the existence of God is that a being of infinite benevolence and omnipotence would not let so much evil transpire in the world. Of course, this would not preclude a deist understanding of God, as responsible for the order of the universe, but loathe to disrupt the flow of events through miracles. The best argument against deism is that the design of the universe is too faulty, for example, permitting hurricanes and tornadoes, creating parasites, and other things which would seem inefficient and unnecessarily cruel.
Of course, there are a couple of caveats. Atheists, for example, are always extolling the idea of "standing on our own two feet". What if God wants us to stand on our own two feet as much as possible, and therefore is economical and mysterious with His benevolence? Also, the possibility that death is not the end of the story, and there is a chance to balance everything in the long run makes it hard to judge just by what is seen on Earth. Finally, what if the original design were impeccable, but was marred by the introduction of evil through the malevolent action of creatures with free will?


Message 15918802



To: Bill Jackson who wrote (151995)6/10/2001 10:27:46 AM
From: Thomas A Watson  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
dear bill >>>>>> some within the control of the person, some random events.
Therefore following the adolf hilter proffer, any person has the right of control and end anothers life. All you have to do is rationalize that someone is not a person and thus terminate. My argument does not consider that their is a God. My argument is that All have rights, life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That's the principle underlying America. The communist countries and Hiltler's third did not follow this.

Your support of choice is an endorsement of the Adlolf Hiltler proffer. You cannot or do not want to see that.

When does life begin?

In 1981 (April 23-24) a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee held hearings on the very
question before us here: When does human life begin? Appearing to speak on behalf of
the scientific community was a group of internationally-known geneticists and
biologists who had the same story to tell, namely, that human life begins at conception
- and they told their story with a profound absence of opposing testimony.

Dr. Micheline M. Mathews-Roth, Harvard medical School, gave confirming testimony,
supported by references from over 20 embryology and other medical textbooks that
human life began at conception.

"Father of Modern Genetics" Dr. Jerome Lejeune told the lawmakers: "To accept the
fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human has come into being is no
longer a matter of taste or opinion ... it is plain experimental evidence."

Dr. Hymie Gordon, Chairman, Department of Genetics at the Mayo Clinic, added: "By all
the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception."

Dr. McCarthy de Mere, medical doctor and law professor, University of Tennessee,
testified: "The exact moment of the beginning of personhood and of the human body is
at the moment of conception."

Dr. Alfred Bongiovanni, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, concluded, "I
am no more prepared to say that these early stages represent an incomplete human
being than I would be to say that the child prior to the dramatic effects of puberty ... is
not a human being."

Dr. Richard V. Jaynes: "To say that the beginning of human life cannot be determined
scientifically is utterly ridiculous."

Dr. Landrum Shettles, sometimes called the "Father of In Vitro Fertilization" notes,
"Conception confers life and makes that life one of a kind." And on the Supreme Court
ruling _Roe v. Wade_, "To deny a truth [about when life begins] should not be made a
basis for legalizing abortion."

Professor Eugene Diamond: "...either the justices were fed a backwoods biology or they
were pretending ignorance about a scientific certainty."

tom watson tosiwmee