Rhea

What is it they say about the act of using Hitler in a debate? It translates unequivocally as "I realize I have lost this argument and don't have a leg to stand on, but I'm going to cling tenaciously anyway to an idea that even I cannot support"

Rhea

Agree completely. Being Christian is completely and unequivocally undetectable from being a non Christian with respect to moral behavior. Contrary to the claims of people like Radorth, Spurly, xian and Magus here and people like pick-your-evangelist on TV or radio or in magazines.


Basically, Christianity has NO IMPACT on morality. And this data suggests, in a roundabout way that it in fact has a negative impact.

My analysis remains undebated: Christians choose broken homes over premarital sex. That's their choice. They feel premarital sex is more wrong than bad marriages or divorce or abortions.

So be it. That's their decision. (I choose to live under a different ranking)

Make one muse - of all of those things, which one's the easiest to repent and desist? Why the one they abhor the most. It's okay to push people toward ends which are difficult to sufficiently repent and impossible to "undo" or painful to undo. It's pretty easy to grow out of premarital sex. It's much harder to step away from a bad marriage, an abortion or a divorce (you'll always be a divorcee unless you remarry your first). Crazy, if you ask me.

christ-on-a-stick

I think the cohabitation issue may well play a part, as I thought AquaVita put well Even those nonreligious couples I have known that chose not to *live* together fulltime before marrying still <gasp> had sex, traveled together and would stay over at each other's places etc. which gives a person an idea of what the day to day living with someone would be like. All these things being "sinful", of course to the fundy Xian.

Then there's the fact that the (fundy) Xian ideal of the roles in marriage are so ridiculously antiquated, ass-backwards and downright stifling. The whole submission thing, as well as a denial of natural human sexuality. Not to drift too far off topic, but while I don't think lifelong monogamy is natural I certainly think it's "do-able". That being said, the Xian idea of it being a sin even to "lust in your heart" (i.e. fantasize about someone else, be physically attracted to someone else etc.) is so utterly unnatural that I imagine it sets up unrealistic expectations for what an ideal Xian marriage should look like. People may feel that they are "failing" when they're just being human, and self-flagellating over natural feelings instead of just saying "hey, it's normal to have certain thoughts and feelings but I choose not to ACT on them" isn't good for one's mental health IMO.

fatherphil

what if you saw data that indicated Christians live longer than atheists, would that cause you to label Christianity superior to atheism?

Rhea

I think there _is_ data that says that.

However, I believe it goes on to say, when you control for social activities and maintained friendships the difference disappears.

Conclusion: You can get the long life by staying active socially. You can choose to do that through as church or through volunteering or through family. It's not _christianity_ that corrolates to long life, it's social activity. That's my memory of that topic.

Corollary:
Women live longer than men. Are women superior to men?

fatherphil

so do you see what i'm refering to? the longer life thing gets explained away, yet it seems like the possible reasons behind the divorce thing are ignored.

Rhea

Not ignored at all. Why would you say that? I asked in my (first?) post - "I would love to see a study that separates the variables" because I do not see how ATHEISM causes more enduring marriages.

So not only am I _not_ ignoring it, but I explicitly lamented the lack of data on "explaining it away" AND figured that the churches could implement whatever it is they find out.

The lifespan study _did_ spell it out. They separated the variables. They controlled for influences. So I (and they) could draw a conclusion on the true causitive influences.

I'll repeat, I'd be interested to know the same for the divorce numbers.

fatherphil

not ignored by you rhea, but certainly by others.

The Frood Dude

As an insider, I can tell you that Barna is what you would call a "fundy." His research is definitely reliable and highly esteemed in the Christian community.


There is a lot of pressure on Christian young people and many of them marry just to have "legitimate" sex. They don't understand themselves, their sexuality, or the committment they are making. Their loins burn and "it is better to marry than burn with passion."

I am shocked to hear of proposals that occur after only two or three dates. I hear testimonies of the couple crying on their wedding night because sex was horrid. Of course, I help them and it provides a steady income, but I wish it weren't so. This needs to change at the top levels of fundy organizations. Time to wake up and smell the data.

brighid

How so? Can you explain how you feel others have ignorned those points? It is presumpuous to conclude that because others have not clearly stated what Rhea has that they have "ignored" the data. You assume they ignored it, but you do not infact KNOW they ignored it.

Let's say atheists do die earlier then Christians one logical conclusion can be made: the societal pressures, harrassment, discrimination, etc. that the Christian society at large places upon non-theists and non-Christian theists has a negative impact on the health of those targeted individuals. Through these tactics Christians appear to have a longer life-span, not entirely due to the positive, social benefits of group support (any group) but through the destruction of opportunity and health of others competing in their environment.

Brighid