Response to The Faithfully Faithless.

Or,,nybrit fights to keep the faithless faith.

This is the response my post 'The Faithfully Faithless' got from nybrit.

You can find the original posts here:

 ~No... You are trying to draw a correlation between crime and religion (or lack of). If you commit a crime it does not mean you do not believe in God; It means you commited a crime, period. ~

My correlation,,if it was one,,and it wasn't,,is no less a valid one than yours was:

*~If atheist wanted a moraless society then you would see atheist commiting more crimes.~*

Besides,,what you provided from my post:

*isn't it more accurately assumable that they are most likely 'atheistic or agnostic' if they are NOT following the tenents of their 'proffessed religion'?*

,,is only erroneous if you ignore the facts contained in the labels used.

(you figure that one out,,if you can.oh,,wait,,you allready showed that you can't)

~If an indivdual describes themself as a christian, then who are you to say they are not, just because they commited a crime. You are labeling people you find unfavourably as belonging to another group, just to maintain your sense of superiority.~

Really?Are you sure of that set of 'assumptions'?

Hey,,FYI,,I am a Christian who is a convicted felon.

I was a Christian when I committed my crimes.

At least that was what I said I was.

And I was,,but I didn't really 'beleive',,at that time I had simple 'faith' which is sometimes fraut with 'disbelief & doubts'.

(which is what defines 'atheism & agnostisism',,no?)

Later in life,,I figured out what was meant by,,'you shall know them by their fruit'.

Now,,I am much more careful about acting out of my 'beliefs' and not from a lack of them.

Nor from a 'base' built on the doubtful foundation of the alternative which you seem to be resting on.

~If I rememeber the original post, it was about the immorality of non-believers and hence their willingness to commit crime. I argued that if that was the case, countries with high percentage of Atheists/Agnostics would experience a higher crime rate. I quoted Finland etc as examples of acountries that have a large Atheist population but a low crime rate.~

here the original post is,,

The first line is the first line I responded to in the starter post for this thread,,I don't selectively ccp in order to change things,,I just respond to them.

Like you do.

This was my response to the line :

~Considering that most folks who commit crimes are dishonest or 'religiously ignorant' enough to not be trusted regarding the veracity of the info,,but by definition,,if they are committing crimes,,they aren't 'following a christian tradition' of not breaking laws.

IOW,,it is not 'ethical' to define the religion by the actions of 'the aberrant few' found amongst them,,is it?~

And the one you ccped,,is the one that followed that set of sentences.

Why didn't you respond to the first two sentences?

As for those countries being shiny examples of 'secular' and non christian,,think again:


~For hundreds of years, the Church of Sweden, an Evangelical Lutheran church, represented the religion of state. However, in 2000, the Church and government placed into effect a formal separation of church and state, with a stipulation that the Church of Sweden will continue to receive a certain degree of state support.~

~The country has maintained a state (Lutheran) church for several hundred years, supported by a general "church tax," although the Government routinely grants any request by a taxpayer for exemption from the tax. All churches receive state financial support.

In 1995 after decades of discussion, the state church and the Government agreed to a formal separation. This reform came into effect in 2000; however, the Church still is to receive some state support.~

~Religions: Lutheran 87%, other (includes Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Baptist, Muslim, Jewish, and Buddhist) 13%

Definition: This entry is an ordered listing of religions by adherents starting with the largest group and sometimes includes the percent of total population.~

~Most Finns are members of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland (82.5 percent).[27] A minority belongs to the Finnish Orthodox Church (1.1 percent) (see Eastern Orthodox Church). Other Protestant denominations and the Roman Catholic Church in Finland are significantly smaller, as are the Muslim, Jewish and other non-Christian communities (totaling 1.2 percent). 15.1 percent[28] of the population is unaffiliated. The main Lutheran and Orthodox churches are the national churches of Finland. Church attendance is much lower than these figures may suggest. Most of the population holds generally secular views. A majority of members of the state Lutheran Church do not participate actively, often attending church only for special occasions like weddings and funerals.[29]~

(sounds like their american non going counterparts,,don't they?)


~Dear CLO,

We have two state religions in Finland:

-The Evangelical Lutheran Church (85 % of Finnish people)

-The Finnish Orthodox Church 1.1 %

We have had a complete freedom of worship since 1923 and we have many religious minorities (e.g. Jehovah 0.3 %, Catholic 0.2 %).~


~The new Freedom of Religion Act came into effect in August 2003. It replaced the previous Act of 1923. Freedom of religion is a constitutional right. It entails the right to profess and practise a religion, the right to express a conviction and the right to belong or not to belong to a religious community.

The rationale behind the new Act is the notion of positive freedom of religion. Religion is considered not only as the individual's own choice but also as part of community tradition. The function of the State is to ensure freedom of religion and create the preconditions for its implementation.~


That's two out of three proven to be just like America,,based and rooted in a Judeo-Christian tradition.

(as in,,not any more secular than America)

Do you want to prove the third?

~However, I did not wish to imply that Atheist and Agnostics are more moral than religious people and so presented the opinion that religion pays no part in crime, but poverty does.~

Yes,,you did,and you know it.

Just because you claim to be honest doesn't mean people can't read what your fruit looks like.

You said,,

*~If atheist wanted a moraless society then you would see atheist commiting more crimes.~*

This is clearly an attempt to use inference to 'color' perception.

After all,,since there are so many more 'non atheists' than there are 'atheists' then one should see a 'correspondingly smaller' number of atheists committing crimes than the other group.


Besides,,I contend that if they are actively seeking a moraless society they would do what is explained in this article:

Not go out and commit petty crimes,,or even felonies.No one claims they're stupid,well,,I don't,,,I just claim that they follow a 'inequitable belief system'.

And this was my response to the 'source of alledged poverty driven crime':

**~Besides,,,most,,and I have some INSIDE knowledge of this subject,,literally,,most crimes are not committed for 'needed items'.The common crime is committed due to 'desire for luxury items' such as recreational drugs or 'bling'.

IOW,,an honest poor man doesn't steal,,he just goes without.

And that blows the 'theory'' that poor has more to do with crime than 'religion'.

Crime is the result of 'desire to fulfill goals above one's means' and regardless of 'cost' to others.~

~You are arguing that morals are the property of religion.~

NO,,I am saying that religious laws became 'governmental laws'.

I am saying 'organised religion' is the 'original politics'.

I am saying that there is no difference between 'partisian politics' and 'denominational divisions'.

They both work the same way and are both used for the same purposes.

Secular humanism,,or atheism if you will,,is one of the participating parties on both sides of the divide.

And you apparently follow the rhetoric as 'religiously' as any 'catholic does their doctrines'.

IMHsmellyO,,of course.

Hey,,this is gonna knock your socks right off:

~I would suggest that the morals in, say the bible for example, just mirror the morals of that time. Some of the morals are appropiate for the 21st century, but others, such as selling your daughter into salvery and killing those who work on the sabbeth, are not.~

Then,,my dear little atheist,,you are in complete agreement with Yeshua.

As He finished the job,,those things were done away with.

Besides,,I don't think you can back up the claim of 'selling your daughter into slavery' was or is a 'law'.

And as for the Sabbath,,'Yeshua became our sabbath'.It is no longer any particular day of the week.

No,,not even one named after the Sun,,or the Sabbath or Saturn,,nor Freya,Wodin,The Moon or even Thor or the other one.

Oh,,and just so you know,,Islam still insists on Sabbath and following such 'rules' as those,,as well as killing those who don't 'believe' at all,,and for marrying a man from the wrong race or religion.

Would you like a link for that?

Do you think the rape and/or murder of a person,,like oh,,maybe a 9 year old kid,,is a crime that 'death' is a suitable punishment for?

Yeshua did.

Mo didn't.

Do you?

With all due respect to all on this planet,,

The DANG-DInGIE American

aka,, The Evil White Man

created on : 1/1/2008

Blog Front

Staks Index

Site Front


©Roy Harbin/The DANG – DinGIE American/2007®


roy harbin is roy l.harbin aka,,the dang-dingie american aka,,the evil white man