Reply With Quote
Copy/paste to this post is not working scott, Link is in post #123
I have been reading this board, thanks.
On the other hand, Manny, for a guy who always claims that people have a reading comprehension problem, not sure you are doing better on that department. Check out again what I posted:
I've bolded the part you seemed to miss.
My point is that quoting the Bible is not the only thing jochh does to support his arguments.
Copy/paste to this post is not working scott, Link is in post #123
That link leads me to a "Cannot find server" message.
It's taking me to the site, retry with this scott.
http://www.taemag.com/issues/article...cle_detail.asp
Same error. Can you provide directions to the article from their main page?
Actually, I can't even get www.taemag.com to come up at all... maybe their site is having problems. I'll try again tomorrow.
I got through on that link. But, it isn't a true academic study persay. It is the research of the articles author. It may be acurate, but he doesn't site sources or show how the raw data was compiled but just provides the results.
You seem to know a lot about Christians in how you talk about what it takes to be one, what they believe, etc.... Can I ask if you have ever called yourself a Christian at any point of your life?I will continue on my wayward and meaningless path of letting data and facts guide me to decisions.
The reason why I ask and quoted your sentence above is because I've had some close people around me say they "tried out religion" and now look for anything and everything possible to disprove Jesus as the son of man. I'm not saying your stats and research are trying to disprove that.. but I've heard it before.
copy and paste this sentence from my post into your browser
inner-city residents who go to church are 59 percent less likely to commit crimes
This is the heading of the first result: The American Enterprise: Good Faith That is the link.
Based on this at least 200 of every 201 people incarcerated would be a Christian.
Facts below refute your research.
National Census of the Jail Population, 1995
According to the DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics (National Census of the Jail Population 12/31/95), while 72% affirmed affiliation with religious ins utions (determined through answers to the question on "Religious Background" on the Penal entrance form) only 54% of Federal and State Prisoners actually consider themselves religious, and 33% can be confirmed to be practicing their religion. This is demonstrated by attendance records at religious services, which averaged anywhere between 30% and 40%, depending upon the time of year and the ins ution in question (and who was preaching). These figures are comparable to the national average as establish by the Gallup organization. [Source: Response to "Christians vs atheists in prison investigation".]
That would be 1 of every 3 instead of 200 of every 201, quite a difference.
The majority of Americans (85%) have a stated religious preference.
2. The majority of American prisoners (between 80 and 100%, depending on the study consulted) also have a stated religious preference.
3. A disproportionately high number of prisoners were not in any way practicing religionists prior to incarceration. That is, they exhibited none of the standard sociological measures of religiosity, such as regular prayer, scripture study, and attendance at worship services.
Attempts to "prove" either simplistic statement: "Religion leads to incarceration" or "Religion prevents incarceration" are polemical in nature and are neither academic in their approach nor statistially supportable. Neither statement is completely true, and both statements ignore the extremely large differences between religions. Each religious affiliation exhibits different statistical properties relating to incarceration.
the segment of the prison population which self-identifies as non-religious is approximately twice as large as found in the general population.
Good reading in the website below.
http://www.adherents.com/misc/adh_prison.html
Last edited by jochhejaam; 10-06-2005 at 06:28 AM.
The most recently posted facts and others posted in this thread offer a sharp contrast to the research/studies offered by the Bureau of Prisons and scott. It should be clear that the closer a person gets to imitating the life of Christ the better off he and society are. Successfully refuting this would be done by proving that adherence to the characteristics Christ exemplified and taught would be harmful to society. The fact that people are incarcerated for committing crimes does not weaken the case for Christianity being a benefit for individuals and society but strenghtens it. I would believe that if the incarcerated were asked "would your crime have been committed if you had followed the teachings of Christianity?" the answer would be overwhelmingly, "No, I would not have"! Strictly following Christ's teaching equates to not commiting crime.
One of the definitions of crime is " a grave offense especially against morality" which is diametrically opposed to what Christ taught. These studies parallel the degree to which a person aligns himself with Christ's teaching reflecting the extent to which he does so. It may expose a persons hypocrisy of claiming to be a Christian or expose his weakness in being committed to adhering to the tenets of Christianity but in no way is it to be construed as adherence to Christian beliefs being detrimental to society.
I find it both annoying and amusing that people violently object to Christianity encroaching on Scientific study, Intelligent Design vs Darwinism , and then they turn right around and attempt to dismantle the merits of Christianity through scientific studies, scott/Bureau of Prisons.
I do and I can show you a thread I started calling out myself.
Can you link me to a post of yours were you admit you were mistaken?
There is a world of difference between someone who casually claims he is a Christian and someone who actually lives the Faith everyday of his life. The former is probably closer to you in his beliefs, the latter is the group you should concentrate your research on (I know this is impossible).
I don't think anyone here minds Christianity going about things in a scientific way. Intelligent design really isn't doing that, however.I find it both annoying and amusing that people violently object to Christianity encroaching on Scientific study, Intelligent Design vs Darwinism , and then they turn right around and attempt to dismantle the merits of Christianity through scientific studies, scott/Bureau of Prisons.
What is the difference? Isn't everyone a sinner? Aren't you supposed to leave the judging to a different party?
This thread doesn't make much sense. It's amazing to me that the people who have objected to scott's study have not tried to question the methods he used when doing his research a single time (unless I missed it). To me, this is the only legitimate way to critique something like that. It is clearly possible to do a similar study using illegimiate, unscientific means and come up with reasonable results. Apparently, coming up with "good" results is all that concerns jochhejaam.
1st thing, We are ALL SINNERS. me and you TOO.
you gonna judge this woman now? who are you? Are you Christian? If so, congrats. If now, who are you to judge? Lets look at the TRUTH. An Evil, Lost man walked into this house, could have raped and killed her, but God gave her the tools to 1st, make this man TRUST her, and 2nd to Help This Man! Maybe it was so she could see the light and Never do drugs again...maybe the light was for him...now that we ALL see IT, maybe it was for US!
Don't worship Drugs is what I get out of it.
yes, take me home...to .
after he said take me DOWN to the PARADISE CITY.
other albums led Appe e for Destruction.
the Name of the Band was Guns and Roses for crying out loud...
it's about the inner turmoils of man. Good vs. Evil. Get it?
that is a good point. but you Know all your sins are forgiven as long as you repent. Actually, that's not true. Blasphemy against your own holy spirit is Not Forgiven...so if You Kill yourself with a bunch of ice, yeah, you have a good chance of going to .
Saved Christians very very rarely commit crimes against humanity. No man is Perfect, but that 1st statement is silly.Are the Christians committing more crimes because they think God will forgive them?
All I know is that I see a lot of people with the fish on their cars speeding and cutting me off in traffic.
As for people with a Jesus Fish speeding and cutting you off? They are not Saved yet. That Fish symbolizes the fact that they are going to School, i.e. Church and are continuing to Learn and Get Closer to Him.
I remember your threads boasting about your driving, and I doubt you got an Audi to got the speed limit sister. Where's your Fish?
Now THIS IS THE POST I'VE BEEN WATING FOR!
Lets analyze!
if the "Christians" (love the use of quotes by the way
The Dems LIKE THE SEPARATION. THEY DO NOT WANT A UNITED COUNTRY!
THEY WANT A COUNTRY IN CHAOS SO THEY CAN PRETEND TO BE THE ONES THAT SAVE IT WHILE LINING THEIR POCKETS!
There are Corrupt REPUBLICANS TOO! don't think I don't see it.
Lust for Money, just LUST and INSECURITY in general Will Be This Countries Downfall....and why not? It's our Own Downfall as well....
Would it be equally amazing to you that scott has not (a single time) offered the methods he used when doing his research in order to quell the objections?
Not good results LG, feasible results.Apparently, coming up with "good" results is all that concerns jochhejaam.
scott has posted in detail his methods in the past if I'm not mistaken.
[QUOTE=jochhejaam]Based on this at least 200 of every 201 people incarcerated would be a Christian.[quote]
That isn't true. If the population of Christians versus non-Christians were identical, then it would be. But if there is only 1 non-Christian in the world, and he is in jail and there were 1000 Christians, and 200 were in Jail, the non-Christian would thereby be 5 times more likely to be imprisoned than the Christian.
1) I've already established that I make no distinction between what is a "good Christian" versus a "bad" or non-practicing one. The 72% would be the number I am concerned with.
Facts below refute your research.
National Census of the Jail Population, 1995
According to the DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics (National Census of the Jail Population 12/31/95), while 72% affirmed affiliation with religious ins utions (determined through answers to the question on "Religious Background" on the Penal entrance form) only 54% of Federal and State Prisoners actually consider themselves religious, and 33% can be confirmed to be practicing their religion. This is demonstrated by attendance records at religious services, which averaged anywhere between 30% and 40%, depending upon the time of year and the ins ution in question (and who was preaching). These figures are comparable to the national average as establish by the Gallup organization. [Source: Response to "Christians vs atheists in prison investigation".]
That would be 1 of every 3 instead of 200 of every 201, quite a difference.
2) Updated statistics published in 1997 (the ones I used) are published on the same page of link you provided shows that only .2% of prison inmates identify themselves as "Atheist", meaning that 99.8% of the prison population identifies with one religion or another (compared to the 14.1% of Americans who identify themselves as atheists, agnostic, humanist, or secular. Of that 99.8%, 83.3% of inmates identify themselves as Christian (compared to the 76.5% of Americans who identify themselves as Christian).
Again, I do not consider religious intensity - only how one identifies themselves. I understand there is a difference between calling yourself a Christian and being a practicing Christian, for the sake of brevity I will say that I was concerned with those who call themselves Christian.The majority of Americans (85%) have a stated religious preference.
2. The majority of American prisoners (between 80 and 100%, depending on the study consulted) also have a stated religious preference.
3. A disproportionately high number of prisoners were not in any way practicing religionists prior to incarceration. That is, they exhibited none of the standard sociological measures of religiosity, such as regular prayer, scripture study, and attendance at worship services.
Well DUH... that is exactly what I've said, isn't it?
Attempts to "prove" either simplistic statement: "Religion leads to incarceration" or "Religion prevents incarceration" are polemical in nature and are neither academic in their approach nor statistially supportable. Neither statement is completely true, and both statements ignore the extremely large differences between religions. Each religious affiliation exhibits different statistical properties relating to incarceration.
In direct contradiction to the statistics listed on the website you provided, which says that .2% of inmates identify themselves as Atheist while the remainer of the population identifies with one religion or another.the segment of the prison population which self-identifies as non-religious is approximately twice as large as found in the general population.
If you define religious as "someone who actively practices a religion" then I can buy off on the above quoted statement. However, for the purposes of my study, I considered anyone who believes in a higher power/God as a "theist" (note, I did not say "religious).
I would like to point out an blatant liberty that the Author of the website you linked to gave... he took the liberty to lump "no answer" into the same category as "Atheist" in the main body of his text. Only 156 people responded as "Atheist" while over 18,000 did not respond to the survey. The author does post the unadultered data in his appendix, but I find it a bit dishonest that he would lump those two categories together. To me, this is a prime example of unethical data manipulation. Not responding to a survey is surely not the same thing as not believing in God.
Thanks for the website, however. It contains some good links to data.
One quick other note about that webpage:
The CUNY American Religious Identification Suvery is the source of the 14% for Atheist/Agnostic/Humanist/Secular number. Jelly managed to find it, why couldn't this author?One atheist web page (http://holysmoke.org/icr-pri.htm) presented statistics stating that 0.209% of federal prisoners (in 1997) stated "atheist" as their religious preference. This site said that this is far less than the 8 to 16% of the American population that are atheists.
The atheist site, however, provided no source for the notion that "8 to 16%" of Americans are atheists. This statistic is completely without support from the available data. Gallup polls which include questions about religion have consistently shown that between 93 and 96% of Americans say that they believe in God.
Your most recently posted study most certainly does not make it "clear that the closer a person gets to imitating the life of Christ the better off he and society are." In fact, the study which you seem very proud of, makes it quite clear that such a statement CANNOT and SHOULD NOT be made.
That is your opinion and you are most certainly en led to it, but I honestly hope you don't think you have "proved" it in this thread. If anything, it stregthens my position that, from a statistical perspective, Christianity and Religion in general is shown not to have an overwhelmingly positive affect on crime - as demonstrated by the low propensity for Athesists to commit them.Successfully refuting this would be done by proving that adherence to the characteristics Christ exemplified and taught would be harmful to society. The fact that people are incarcerated for committing crimes does not weaken the case for Christianity being a benefit for individuals and society but strenghtens it. I would believe that if the incarcerated were asked "would your crime have been committed if you had followed the teachings of Christianity?" the answer would be overwhelmingly, "No, I would not have"! Strictly following Christ's teaching equates to not commiting crime.
LuvBones, I was raised Catholic and attended a High School/Seminary. I have a great deal of respect for the Catholic church and the Oblates who taught me both how to think and how to be a man. I keep in close touch with an Oblate who had a very strong impact in my life - and he continues to be one of the best people I know of to engage in a meaningful debate about Spirituality and Religion with. I also have a very good friend who was ordaned and now serves in the Vatican - he's a rising star in the Church - and he is also I talk to alot about on this topic. Never once have I had an "angry" arguement with either of these people, and we all respect each other a great deal.
I hope that answers your question - I would be happy to answer any others.
I don't think I've every objected to the melding of Science and Theism, in fact I have a posting on my blog that states my SUPPORT for the teaching of intelligent design (although not in high school science classes). I think the pursuit of theists to incorporate science is excellent, and I excitedly await scientific evidence/observation of a higher power.I find it both annoying and amusing that people violently object to Christianity encroaching on Scientific study, Intelligent Design vs Darwinism , and then they turn right around and attempt to dismantle the merits of Christianity through scientific studies, scott/Bureau of Prisons.
With that said, I don't think that Intelligent Design, in its current form, is science.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
