Study: Liberals, atheists, have higher IQs

[spurraider21]

yeah lets all be lazy when it comes to thinking and just sing kumbaya

much better

[Chinook]

yeah lets all be lazy when it comes to thinking and just sing kumbaya

much better

I'm game. I'll even bring my banjolele.

[RD2191]

Same way with my wife.


But that fat maalox has no ing class or manners and she belongs in here with the rest of us s .





What a lady.

[xellos88330]

Then what are you saying? Let me guess: that the Holy Books of different people from different religions are all expressions of the same God revealing Himself in diverse ways to various cultures? If so, then I have to admit, I too once subscribed to that idea; it was an appealing way to reconcile people from various creeds with conflicting beliefs. But alas:

“I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6)


Thank you for your explanation.

I'm glad that you're concede that the Bible consists of "outdated customs, rituals and knowledge of an outdated culture" and that its content is "archaic and barbaric." I hope you relay that message to the people in your country (including many in this thread) who advocate for the teaching of Creationism instead of Evolution in schools, who think gay marriage is an abomination, who think the Earth is 6,000 years old, and who believe dinosaurs walked among humans. They certainly seem to have missed your point.

Also, please allow me to point out that you've actually contradicted yourself just now. Because in an earlier post, you wrote:


By saying that "the books are meant to teach for the betterment of mankind," you seem to be implying that people derive their morality from the Bible. But you suddenly seem to have changed your mind, and are now saying that people no longer get their morals from the Bible, because they no longer, among other things, stone others for blasphemy. In other words, you are conceding that there is a third-party source from which people derive their morals.


According to a recent Gallup poll, 28% of Americans still take the Bible as the literal word of God. That's 88,760,000 people. I would hardly say that people do not take the Bible literally anymore.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/170834/th...-word-god.aspx

The Bible is full of contradictions, but it doesn't mean that there isn't a message to be had. Take some of the commandments for example.

Thou shalt not kill.
Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Thou shalt not steal.
Thou shalt not bear false witness.
Thou shalt not covet.
Honor your father and mother.

Are those not guidelines for the betterment of society and mankind? Some of those still hold true to this day with laws passed based on them. I certainly don't want anyone killing me, ing my wife, robbing me, lying to me, etc. I am quite positive that you don't either.

According to that poll 28% of people believe that the Bible is the literal word of God. Why aren't they stoning the out of people. Freedom to practice religion is one of the foundations that this nation was built on. The commandment says that you shouldn't kill. Perhaps this is why most people aren't running amok slaughtering people for their lack of faith in the one true God? Or could it be that perhaps only 518 people questioned isn't enough to speak for everyone?

You also quoted a bible passage stating that there is only one God using the Bible.

The Quran
"He is the One GOD; the Creator, the Initiator, the Designer. To Him belong the most beautiful names. Glorifying Him is everything in the heavens and the earth. He is the Almighty, Most Wise." (Quran, 59:24 )

The Torah also has a similar passage.
"Yahweh, He is God; there is no other besides Him." Deuteronomy 4:35

Which of these is correct? They both mean the same thing. There is one God. You can call him whatever name you want, but in the end, aren't they all worshipping only one God?

[xellos88330]

To xellos,

Don't capitalize "atheist" or "theist". You seem to not have a problem with "astronaut" so why do you think "atheist" or "theist" is somehow a proper noun? Do you capitalize "runner" or "bassist"?

Sounds pedantic eh? The capitalization of the word "atheist" is the precursor to then insisting atheism is a religion, which it's not.

Atheism is the default position for any claim made of any god. If I tell you there's this god you need to meet, you're instantly atheistic toward that god. That's a natural reaction, it's why we are still alive on this planet, the ability to discriminate based on probability of a claim being factual. So to paint atheism as anything other than the innate sense of skepticism regarding god claims is at best wrong and at worst completely dishonest. All the verbal gymnastics in the world won't shunt that fact.

So although I don't subscribe to the entire IQ debate (people with IQ's over 140 are often boring and self absorbed, or so I'm told), the tendency of the ignorant (not meaning stupid) is to take what they consider the safer route, herd mentality, and growing up in a religious environment means you claim to be a god believer yourself, and though you might have questions internally about it, you don't pursue them since they might cause you harm. What if is real after all? Gambler's fallacy is probably the most utilized tool in the Southern US where religion is concerned.

Heh... didn't realize I capitalized them.

[Uriel]

You do realize Neil deGrasse Tyson is a liberal atheist, right?

[Bill_Brasky]

yeah lets all be lazy when it comes to thinking and just sing kumbaya

much better

Might as well. It would accomplish more than these riveting edgy spurstalk debates that everyone takes so seriously. If you care about it so much then go outside and do something about it. Otherwise, shut the up. You posting your opinion on here isnt changing anyones mind either way. Its literally useless.

[Bill_Brasky]

You do realize Neil deGrasse Tyson is a liberal atheist, right?

Omg what!!!! theres no way he realized that when he posted it you dumb .

[TeyshaBlue]

[mouse]

What good is a IQ score when you act immature online?

[DMC]

The Bible is full of contradictions, but it doesn't mean that there isn't a message to be had. Take some of the commandments for example.

Thou shalt not kill.
Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Thou shalt not steal.
Thou shalt not bear false witness.
Thou shalt not covet.
Honor your father and mother.

Are those not guidelines for the betterment of society and mankind? Some of those still hold true to this day with laws passed based on them. I certainly don't want anyone killing me, ing my wife, robbing me, lying to me, etc. I am quite positive that you don't either.

According to that poll 28% of people believe that the Bible is the literal word of God. Why aren't they stoning the out of people. Freedom to practice religion is one of the foundations that this nation was built on. The commandment says that you shouldn't kill. Perhaps this is why most people aren't running amok slaughtering people for their lack of faith in the one true God? Or could it be that perhaps only 518 people questioned isn't enough to speak for everyone?

You also quoted a bible passage stating that there is only one God using the Bible.

The Quran
"He is the One GOD; the Creator, the Initiator, the Designer. To Him belong the most beautiful names. Glorifying Him is everything in the heavens and the earth. He is the Almighty, Most Wise." (Quran, 59:24 )

The Torah also has a similar passage.
"Yahweh, He is God; there is no other besides Him." Deuteronomy 4:35

Which of these is correct? They both mean the same thing. There is one God. You can call him whatever name you want, but in the end, aren't they all worshipping only one God?

Do you think it was ok to do any of that before those commandments? Do you think other religions didn't have tenets very similar to those even before Christianity, Judaism? How about remembering the sabbath? How about God being a jealous god? Those are right in there with murder and adultery.

[spurraider21]

You do realize Neil deGrasse Tyson is a liberal atheist, right?

That has nothing to do with why I posted it

[xellos88330]

Do you think it was ok to do any of that before those commandments? Do you think other religions didn't have tenets very similar to those even before Christianity, Judaism? How about remembering the sabbath? How about God being a jealous god? Those are right in there with murder and adultery.

I was using those few commandments as an example because I was showing that the Bible does have some bearing on teaching morality in response to the claim Uriel presented. Whether or not you follow all of the commandments in their entirety is your personal choice. We all have free will whether it was bestowed by a supreme being or not. I do not put my stock into a single religion, but feel that they all have their high and low points. I do however make it a point to argue when I feel that one is claiming to be better than another simply because a study concluded with an assumption. I don't recall receiving an intelligence test on this subject.

Religion existed long before Christianity, Judaism etc. There was paganism before Christianity and they had their gods of peace such as Pax or Eirene. I am simply stating that ALL religions do help teach morality and basic guidelines regardless of the timeline. Religion has its uses, and no one can deny it.... God existing or not. Why argue the existence of a supreme being when there are good lessons to be learned to begin with regardless of a persons beliefs?

[Chinook]

That has nothing to do with why I posted it

I'm not sure if he's really following this discussion properly. He definitely doesn't seem like a very experienced debater, though he's eager.

[spurraider21]

I'm not sure if he's really following this discussion properly. He definitely doesn't seem like a very experienced debater, though he's eager.

i have a high IQ, and high IQ people tend to be good debaters. your intellectual inferiority is triggering this defense mechanism of yours

[FuzzyLumpkins]

All you people have done is hurl insults without providing even a single coherent argument against my assertions. The very purpose of this thread was to debate the study that liberals and atheists have higher IQs. Considering that the people in thread who are actually engaging in intellectually honest and sophisticated debate are either liberal (Chinook, xellos88330) or atheist (spurraider21, DMC, FuzzyLumpkins), while all you two have done is engage in personal attacks, seems to prove the very premise of this thread.

I'm not an atheist. Just because I reject the logical proofs on God and have no empirical basis for a diety doesn't mean that I don't believe. My state of mind is outside of belief

[RD2191]

[RD2191]

[RD2191]

[RD2191]

[FuzzyLumpkins]

So we have Rob fantasizing about what the people he disagrees with look like and CN glorifying appearing "not smart."

Bravo.

[silverblk mystix]

DMC

[ChumpDumper]

lol Bertie with the angry ad hominem tsunami

[DMC]

And neither does saying "argument by repe ion".



And I told you where to find them. If you don't want to look it up, that's fine by me.

Two examples of you making a claim and expecting me to do the leg work to either disprove it or look it up. Do your own work.

Just a convention. The god claim is not empirical, so it's not supposed to be tested empirically.

Who decides what ought to be here? Wouldn't that be an epistemology issue, not a rule issue? Also, while you're at it, what exactly is the god claim or do I need to go look that up as well?

That's not the gambler's fallacy. You were saying people don't want to risk burning in for blasphemy. That has nothing to do with using recent results to predict new results of something that has a fix probability.

Yeah I meant Pascal's Wager but I think you knew that. I do appreciate the 10 cent philosophy terminology lessons though.

Same thing.

You could call anything a freedom from something else but that's not what you meant. He was rich, but after being scammed of all his money, is now free from it, ergo he was scammed to find freedom. Same thing.. right?

Again, didn't bring it up. Just agreed with Spurraider's opinion on Uriel's critique.

For a reason.

[DMC]

I was using those few commandments as an example because I was showing that the Bible does have some bearing on teaching morality in response to the claim Uriel presented. Whether or not you follow all of the commandments in their entirety is your personal choice. We all have free will whether it was bestowed by a supreme being or not. I do not put my stock into a single religion, but feel that they all have their high and low points. I do however make it a point to argue when I feel that one is claiming to be better than another simply because a study concluded with an assumption. I don't recall receiving an intelligence test on this subject.

You're wrong, and I just showed you that. The Bible didn't teach those things, it plagiarized them from society. Like I said, those tenets existed prior to the 10 commandments. Even though I posed that question to you, you still think somehow that the Bible invented morality, that murder was allowed before the OT and that people were ing each others' wives until someone said stop. But wait, how did marriage come about if it existed prior to the commandments? Isn't it a religious ins ution? Odd that all cultures recognize marriage (for the most part).

Religion existed long before Christianity, Judaism etc. There was paganism before Christianity and they had their gods of peace such as Pax or Eirene. I am simply stating that ALL religions do help teach morality and basic guidelines regardless of the timeline. Religion has its uses, and no one can deny it.... God existing or not. Why argue the existence of a supreme being when there are good lessons to be learned to begin with regardless of a persons beliefs?

Why do you make a claim then say "no one can deny it"? I can deny it. Religion has done more harm than good. Even today, the wars of the world are fought in the name of some non-existent god. Believing you have an edict from the creator of the universe cannot ever be good, ever. History has shown that to be true.