Monique D. Davis - a bigot

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Davis: I don

Edited April 14, 2008 by Deadly_Nightshade

[Humodour]

Yeah, well if it were Australia I'd tell you to get over it and worry about something else.

 

But Americans seems to have an interpretation of religion (and everything) that is far too literal. It's probably all the Protestants. Booo you need more Catholics.

Edited April 14, 2008 by Krezack

[Walsingham]

As Krez says, if it were Europe or the Commonwealth I'd shrug it off. BUt thanks to teh fact that non-nutcases don't seem to vote in the US ...you're b****ered. Enjoy!

[Xard]

Yeah, well if it were Australia I'd tell you to get over it and worry about something else.

 

But Americans seems to have an interpretation of religion (and everything) that is far too literal. It's probably all the Protestants. Booo you need more Catholics.

 

Silly thing to say considering Nordic countries are most welfaring and secular countries in the world. Oh, and they're all protestants

[Enoch]

Yeah, religion in America is odd. The theory is that the long tradition of a religious "free market" in America encourages people to "shop around" for the faith that fits them, as opposed to other countries with a state religion where it takes a greater non-conformist step to join a different faith. With an established faith, people who are just a little bit unhappy with their religion will be less likely to change it, and instead simply follow it with less devotion. After a couple of generations of that devotional diminution, the society generally becomes less religious overall and more accepting of the overtly irreligious.

 

On the other hand, in America, where people have fewer barriers to switching to a different religion, people are more apt to switch to a different faith if unhappy, and retain their overall their level of devotion/piety/whatever. This leads to religious adherence that is more constant across generational divides, and, sadly, a higher incidence of intolerance toward the overtly irreligious.

Edited April 14, 2008 by Enoch

[Hurlshort]

Both of these people are lame. Both are blinded by their fanaticism.

[Sand]

Everyone has the right to believe what they will as long as they don't try to force what they believe on others. The only way that is possible is to keep religion and state separate. Religion is a private affair, not a public one and thusly should be removed from public venues such as public schools.

[Gorgon]

Atheism and religious belief are both absolutist ideologies.

 

The statement that 'god does not exists' is just as uncompromising as 'god exists'. Education shouldn't waste time on either, and least of all the US right wing Christians who seem to constantly crave attention.

[Humodour]

Yeah, well if it were Australia I'd tell you to get over it and worry about something else.

 

But Americans seems to have an interpretation of religion (and everything) that is far too literal. It's probably all the Protestants. Booo you need more Catholics.

 

Silly thing to say considering Nordic countries are most welfaring and secular countries in the world. Oh, and they're all protestants

 

Australia's not Protestant (well, like 25%), and it beats the majority of Nordic countries at development and welfare.

 

WIN!

 

Remember, correlation implies causation.

[J.E. Sawyer]

Atheism and religious belief are both absolutist ideologies.

 

The statement that 'god does not exists' is just as uncompromising as 'god exists'. Education shouldn't waste time on either, and least of all the US right wing Christians who seem to constantly crave attention.

One can hold a belief and still admit their own fallibility. "I believe this to the best of my knowledge and experience, but my knowledge and experience are limited." A theist may admit the possibility that no god(s) exists and an atheist may admit the possibility that god(s) exists -- and this doesn't make them agnostic.

 

I don't want people to be compromising in their religious beliefs; I want them to be compromising in their attitudes toward the beliefs of others. This is easier for people with beliefs that don't involve a soteriology focusing on people who are, by default, damned.

[random n00b]

Unfortunately, Faith is, by definition, a God-inspired certainty that God exists. Certainty, not belief.

 

This makes it kind of hard to be a by-the-book (read: fundie) Catholic and not think of others as heathens.

[Humodour]

Actually, by definition, faith has nothing directly to do with god. You can capitalise it all you want but that won't change.

[thepixiesrock]

You can be apologetic, ecumenical, academic, or a combination of them.

[Humodour]

I'm an Atheist Catholic. How's that for you?

[thepixiesrock]

But... but... That doesn't combine any of the options I gave you to choose from!

[Humodour]

I know. I'm tricky like that.

[random n00b]

Actually, by definition, faith has nothing directly to do with god. You can capitalise it all you want but that won't change.

Huh?

 

Faith is one of the three Theological Virtues, as listed in the Bible. As such, it can only be attained by means of Divine Grace. This is Roman Catholicism, btw.

 

And I didn't make the rules for capitalisation, bub...

Edited April 14, 2008 by random n00b

[Xard]

Yeah, well if it were Australia I'd tell you to get over it and worry about something else.

 

But Americans seems to have an interpretation of religion (and everything) that is far too literal. It's probably all the Protestants. Booo you need more Catholics.

 

Silly thing to say considering Nordic countries are most welfaring and secular countries in the world. Oh, and they're all protestants

 

Australia's not Protestant (well, like 25%), and it beats the majority of Nordic countries at development and welfare.

 

 

...what the hell are you smoking, there's reason why Nordic countries are usually called "folkhemmet" (esp. Sweden and Finland)

 

That doesn't translate into GPD's either. Australia is one of the best faring countries in the world but claiming it beats majority of Nordic countries at development and welfare is ridiculous and false (I even went to check official list for this, geez)

[random n00b]

...what the hell are you smoking, there's reason why Nordic countries are usually called "folkhemmet" (esp. Sweden and Finland)

 

That doesn't translate into GPD's either. Australia is one of the best faring countries in the world but claiming it beats majority of Nordic countries at development and welfare is ridiculous and false (I even went to check official list for this, geez)

Actually, he needn't have smoked anything.

 

I don't know what "official lists" you checked but...

[Xard]

...what the hell are you smoking, there's reason why Nordic countries are usually called "folkhemmet" (esp. Sweden and Finland)

 

That doesn't translate into GPD's either. Australia is one of the best faring countries in the world but claiming it beats majority of Nordic countries at development and welfare is ridiculous and false (I even went to check official list for this, geez)

Actually, he needn't have smoked anything.

 

I don't know what "official lists" you checked but...

 

And what two countries are above Australia? That's right, Norway and Iceland

 

Finland and Sweden aren't far back either.

 

Then there's bunch of other things such as how equality fares etc. lists on which esp. Sweden ranks at the top - Finland too from time to time. Not to mention we finns have best (and free) education system in the world according to PISA

Edited April 14, 2008 by Xard

[random n00b]

And what two countries are above Australia? That's right, Norway and Iceland

As opposed to Sweden and Finland, as you claimed.

 

 

Finland and Sweden aren't far back either.

 

Then there's bunch of other things such as how equality fares etc. lists on which esp. Sweden ranks at the top - Finland too from time to time. Not to mention we finns have best (and free) education system in the world according to PISA

I'm not disputing any of that. HDI is an overall indicator, though. Just a heads-up for you to check your facts before going postal with the flamethrower.

[Xard]

Iceland, Denmark and Norway are all part of Nordic countries. I just used Sweden and Finland as examples as they tend to respectively rank as 1. and 2. best places to be born in world in many studies (I would object to that being finn myself but... *shrug*

[Deadly_Nightshade]

The statement that 'god does not exists' is just as uncompromising as 'god exists'.

 

Atheism does not say that "'god does not exist" - it is the belief that there is no god or gods. You have confused gnostic atheism with atheism.

[Humodour]

Yeah, well if it were Australia I'd tell you to get over it and worry about something else.

 

But Americans seems to have an interpretation of religion (and everything) that is far too literal. It's probably all the Protestants. Booo you need more Catholics.

 

Silly thing to say considering Nordic countries are most welfaring and secular countries in the world. Oh, and they're all protestants

 

Australia's not Protestant (well, like 25%), and it beats the majority of Nordic countries at development and welfare.

 

 

...what the hell are you smoking, there's reason why Nordic countries are usually called "folkhemmet" (esp. Sweden and Finland)

 

That doesn't translate into GPD's either. Australia is one of the best faring countries in the world but claiming it beats majority of Nordic countries at development and welfare is ridiculous and false (I even went to check official list for this, geez)

 

"Official list"? Well, I'm amused but I'll humour you. Where is this official list? I rather think this is a fairly fluid matter and the absolute, objective emphasis you place on it seems out of place. Even the rankings I use below are mere guidelines and if you examine them closely the gaps between the countries at the top make deviating based on rank essentially pointless.

 

I don't see how it is "ridiculous and false" anyway. Do you perhaps think Australia being founded by tribesmen and prisoners somehow implies poor living standards 200 years later?

 

I acknowledge GDP is not an accurate measure of living standards. I'm glad you brought this up because per capita most Nordic nations beat Australia (at 16th). Although in terms of total GDP Australia beats them all.

 

Anyway, onwards to the Human Development Index (measures things like standard of living, welfare, development, education). Only two Nordic countries (or any countries) beat Australia (3rd). Those are Iceland (1st) and Norway (2nd).

 

Some would suggest using the Subjective Satisfaction Index instead, but I'm not sure that's a good idea for two reasons:

1) it's subjective - opinion based, and thus of little absolute importance in terms of standard of living, welfare, development - things the HDI is best at measuring, and the things you brought up in this discussion.

2) following from 1, Australians have a well documented and well known cynicism about their country, which exhibits itself most obviously in a strong collective Tall Poppy Syndrome

 

But if that is the measurement index you wish to use, I certainly concede the Norse countries mostly beat Australia and New Zealand.

 

Only one Norse country beats Australia at life expectancy (depending on the source it is Sweden or Iceland, yet strangely not both).

 

According to the OECD, education in Australia is generally only beaten by Finland and sometimes Sweden (of the Norse countries).

 

In most rankings New Zealand is always close behind or ahead of Australia, too, which is nice.

 

Hmm, actually, considering how well Finland consistently does at all these rankings it makes me want to visit there sometime soon.

 

Edit: And yeah I'm going on your "majority of Norse countries beat Australia" claim here. It is my belief that 1 or 2 out of 5 (or 6 if you include Estonia) does not constitute a majority.

Edited April 14, 2008 by Krezack

[Enoch]

How did this thread turn into a ****-waving contest between Aussies and Scandinavians (Scandies?) on which nanny state is the most nurturing?