As Christianity wanes, immoral behavior increases

Suit yourself, I think you are just refusing to look at opposing evidence. The actual proves the possible.

At least you call graduates of a Christian prison group 'winners', that's some progress.

 

From you, that religion has the power to change people's lives.

I suspect the OP author meant things other than crime when he said morality, like maybe the breakdown of the family. We have seen tremendous negative societal fallout from this here.

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0079.html

"A 2002 study by the Max Planck Institute, for example, concluded that countries with the lowest rates of family dissolution and out-of-wedlock births are "strongly dominated by the Catholic confession." The same study found that in countries with high levels of family dissolution, religion in general, and Catholicism in particular, had little influence."

 

Religious teachings are the true evil concepts that have perverted the original course of humanity for millenniums. They have concocted evil fairy stories about something that is suppose to be good, and turned that goodness into evil, for their own deceitful agendas. Agendas based on nothing more than evil, that keeps themselves elevated above everyone else for power and money.

When humanity finally throws off their chains of Christianity and other perverse religions, then they will realise what a burden has been lifted from their shoulders.

Immoral behaviour will not increase, but will eventually not acceptable, as our society understands WE have the power of free will; and churches and religious doctrines have absolutely NO power, and are only evil fairy stories which have been written by man to keep all other men & women subjugated for power and profit.

There is only one evil in this world teaching hate and discrimination towards other human being, and evil in religions.

 

You'll be sad to know Christianity is predicted to grow 50% between 2000 and 2050.

That is a rant, not debate. Getting back to the OP about whether people are behaving worse as Christianity wanes in the US, here is an item where 300 ferral youth at Proviso West High School rioted, the police having to be brought in, and it took them hours to get it under control: http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Students-Brawl-at-Proviso-East-High-School-210539221.html That was not happening in 1960, back before 70% of inner city youth were born to unwed parents.

 

Since we're being acusatory here, I'll point out you were shown a quote from the Wall Street Journal, who I assume check out their sources, and dismissed it as some kind of unverified anecdote because it didn't fit your world-view. That is less than honest.

 

Ah, OK, thanks. Well, its a bit odd when someone tells you that they agree with something, to ask them what people who disagree would say. You're kinda asking the wrong guy.

I didn't say crime, I also said morality. If the question was crime then it would really be an open and shut case. It's only because 'morality' is a word that offers wriggle room that there can even be any disagreement.

 

No.
He is expressing his frustration with discussing something with someone who is willingly ignorant. You have been given the information necessary to understand why the results of the prison program have been horribly skewed. It isn't a stretch or a difficult concept that he has given VERY clear data regarding.
They cooked the books, and when you don't the results are very different.
You have been proven wrong. It happens to all of us. The best way to handle that is to take your licks and look for a better argument for your case, because the one you brought is a complete loser.

 

Myself, and others, don't think it is 'horribly skewed'. It isn't exactly a fringe position that prison ministries can improve prisoner behavior, and that there is evidence to back that up. That being the case, why not put this issue aside and address the others that I brought up that support the idea that Christianity can reform prisoners, or is this temper tantrum just a convenient excuse not to do so?

 

Not a temper tantrum in the least.
Just simple observation of your refusal to deal with the truth.
You have revealed yourself on this thread as someone that has chosen to throw away their own credibility, just as the group trying to defend their "success" with their prison program have done.
It is embarrassing to others watching you ignore the obvious.

 

And as a result, the people began to look for a Christian society, the pro-capitalist tory party was wiped out and the movement to socialism started. Yes - we need to concentrate our attention on what Christianity is about. The only place the Revival didn't reach was the Penrhyn quarries, which had been on strike for a year and more. They understood already.

 

Uh, wouldn't that apply to those who refuse to respond to my posts about changed lives?

LOL, like I care what someone on the internet thinks, who also won't respond to debate points.

- - - Updated - - -

Although I disagree with your comments, thank you for being man enough to repond to my post.

 

5000 years ago it was "As devotion to Isis wanes, immoral behavior increases...."

 

People aren't likely to respond to your further desperate attempts when you refuse to acknowledge the lack in your first one.
If you admit the problems of the first abortion of an argument, you may find people finding you a credible person to converse with.
As it is, you are showing yourself to be completely obtuse.

 

Dodge noted.

 

How very right you are. Someone here is absolutely dodging something.

 

Well, it doesn't take much manliness. All my ancestors lived through the Revival, and it changed our Country hugely, as you say. 'Dechrau Canu, Dechrau Canmol', a television programme, was recently visiting the chapel where it started: for years and years preachers were trying to start a new Revival; people even still tell jokes about those days, so they are not forgotten. The question, really, is how red-hot Christianity interacts with society - and that is another matter: give unto Caesar whatever doesn't belong to God - if you can find anything in that line, anywhere, ever.

 

No dodge.
The rest of your arguments are simply anecdotal. They aren't studies that describe trends. Son of Sam is irrelevant.
Your post confirms your obtuse nature.

 

And they'd be wrong, for all of the numerous reasons I have previously listed and you have ignored. You either were too dumb to understand, or too dishonest to admit it. This is exactly the same issue as previously stated with the correlation between christianity and crime - I showed you how your correlation completely fell apart after the 80s, and then you refused to admit you were wrong or offer a counter-argument, and instead changed the subject.

Because debating with someone who will never admit he is wrong, or who is incapable of understanding the arguments he is presented with, is not interesting or education. It's just frustrating - especially when that person is oh so wrong. If you are incapable of admitting that you are wrong, or understanding basic tenets of rational debate, then I'm not interested.

 

and all one has to do is look at Mexico... it's up to 98% Christian now... doesn't seem to make them more "moral"

 

I think he means we need to burn more witches and heretics, like in the good ol' days.

 

Devotion to Quetzalcoatl has waned, and immorality has thrived....

Seriously, Mexico used to be 100% Catholic, the one true religion, as protestant religions (the tools of Satan) have crept in, so has the immorality.....

 

No you didn't, that was your opinion, which I rejected. The fact is, all crime categories except one are up since 1960. In 1960, less than 10% of births were out of wedlock, in 2010 it was 41% and over 70% among blacks, which supports the OP.

As I said suit yourself. I've seen this act before, debator X thinks he is the ultimate arbiter of all issues and throws a hissy fit if someone doesn't agree.

Want to tell me what changed the Son of Sam?

 

At least they aren't doing this anymore in Mexico:

"For the re-consecration of Great Pyramid of Tenochtitlan in 1487, the Aztecs reported that they sacrificed about 80,400 prisoners over the course of four days, though there were probably far fewer sacrifices. According to Ross Hassig, author of Aztec Warfare, "between 10,000 and 80,400 persons" were sacrificed in the ceremony.[41] The higher estimate would average 14 sacrifices per minute during the four-day consecration. (As a comparison, the Auschwitz concentration camp, working 24 hours a day with modern technology, approached but did not equal this pace: it murdered about 19,200 a day at its peak.) Four tables were arranged at the top so that the victims could be jettisoned down the sides of the temple.[42]"

Wikipedia

 

And given as you are trying to draw a straight line between two points when the entire dataset is of over 50 years, this means nothing. You don't understand this. This is not opinion, this is basic statistics. You are trying to create a correlation, the correlation breaks down completely unless you oversimplify the data to the point where it's a mockery, and you are simply wrong. And this is why I'm not going to debate with you - because if you don't see the problem with correlating these two graphs:





Then you need a remedial statistics class, not a debate partner.

 

So as Christianity declined, and atheism increased, violent crime was reduced, interesting.....