You have it exactly backwards. It is the religious who are uneducated and backward. That is why religion is more prevalent in the South.

There are very few uneducated atheists, Jennifer being the exception.

------------

Of the 15% atheist, 8% are uneducated.
.

I dispute your statistic.

Okay Jimbo, we’ll check your facts and statistics.

Oh that’s right, you never have any.

Skippy

I wonder how many of the 85% religious folks are un- or undereducated.

 

Gotta be a bunch cuz it doesn't take any smarts to believe in ghosties and magic.

Religion is declining and atheism is rising in the US. That is one reason why religious conservatives are opposed to public education. It is easier to get the sheep to follow when they are ignorant and uneducated.

I don't need to back it up. It is true. The religious nuts on here never back anything up. When they do, I will, also.

Hi Vic,

 

Since we see no URL link or any mention of a source -- we have to assume that YOU wrote this complete post which began this discussion.    Therefore, when Jimi and Puppy question your facts, your statistics -- they have no where to look but at YOU.  You have made this appear to be YOUR writing -- therefore the statistics must be YOURS.  

 

Can you see where it would be much better to include in your post the source of your information, the URL, etc. -- then, Jimi, Puppy, and the rest of the secular lost can look at and argue with the source -- and not with YOU.  And, you will be able to tell Jimi, Puppy, et al -- "If you can read -- take a look at the source of my statement."   Sure will take a load off your shoulders.   Just a thought.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

 

The unaccredited source was: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...in_the_United_States

It's also the source for this:

"A 2001 survey directed by Dr. Ariela Keysar for the City University of New York indicated that, amongst the more than 100 categories of response, "no religious identification" had the greatest increase in population in both absolute and percentage terms. This category included atheists, agnostics, humanists, and others with no theistic religious beliefs or practices. Figures are up from 14.3 million in 1990 to 34.2 million in 2008, representing a proportionate increase from 8% of the total in 1990 to 15% in 2008.[4] Another nation-wide study puts the figure of unaffiliated persons at 16.1%.[24]"

Jimi you really need to enlighten us with many more post of your infinite wisdom.  I doubt atheism could find such a capable example of a promising atheist than you.  You really need to elaborate much more on the uneducated and ignorant as you seem best capable to relate to those than anyone else in the forum.  I think you do Atheism and Liberal a great Justice by presenting a shining example of the sample.  Public education should stand tall and proud to know you were one of their products.  . 

If you are interested in the uneducated and ignorant, you need only look in a mirror.

GB says, "You really need to elaborate much more on the uneducated and ignorant as you seem best capable to relate to those than anyone else in the forum."

May I, Jimi?

You, GB, are a perfect example.  No matter how much evidence is thrown at you concerning scientific matters, you absolutely refuse to accept it.  One glaring example is your perennial pronouncement along the lines of, "If man came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" and, of course, your insistence on the Shroud of Turin's authenticity despite the overwhelming evidence that it is a painting done many hundreds of years after the events supposedly took place. 

I'm not sure "ignorance" is the proper word.  I think you're just plain dumb.

"The church" won't even go as far as to declare the shroud authentic, but they know they don't have to. Just the slightest suggestion that it is the shroud of jesus is enough to get all "the faithful" off and running, and saying only old devils would dare question it. 

--------------------------------------------

Well, if it ain't the blue nose heathen,,,,No matter how much scientific evidence

is thrown at you, you're too chicken scht to read it for fear of learning the truth.

 

Ignorance is the right word for you, because you just don't know and no

guts to learn. Sometimes ignorance is dumb, like you, sad and sick.

 

Painting,,,what a dumb azz.  YOU FOOLS AREN'T WORTH THE TIME

ON THIS FORUM.

 

Iv

Inv, 

 

Your words, they wound me.

 

 

You Mr unobtanium are a example of the hateful old atheist heathern that gives the good atheist who leave people alone a bad name. Preacher says that people like you have something missing or are just mad at God. You better straighten up and fly right before you find yourself in the lake of fire. It will be to late for your butt then.

I am not wanting to be mean just want to save all you heatherns.

Uno, you are a good one to attempt to accuse anyone of not accepting evidence or the like.  You pronounced the Shroud a painting based on ONE individual who without direct contact with the shroud pronounced, from his own bias, that it was paint.  I provided multiple and many URL links which not only disputed the one you cling to but are scientific studies not of a religious nature or by a Religious organization yet you will not accept them or even consider them so just who is it that is being willfully ignorant.

 

As for evolution and the monkeys you categorize my reason for opposition wrongly.  For one what I said was that IF Evolution was correct and IF man evolved from monkeys ( i.e. monkey to man) then as we live and breath today those incremental transitions should still be alive, breathing, and walking around for us to see and analyze and not just in fossils.  If you start with a monkey and end with a man then there should be well defined transitional states all along from one state to the next.  If Evolution was factual and true, being a non-intelligent process that just happens and you have one state, as in monkeys, and the same environment to promote a change then that very change should still be going on and there should be ample evidence of each transitional state alive and living today.  This not only applies to man but any other species. 

 

If you have the original starting point and the same environment then the same process should be self-replicating for being unintelligent it has no way of knowing that it has evolved and therefore is leaving all the other base states behind by just stopping the process.  There should be ample evidence of transitional species all over in every form of life.  That's just one problem I see with Evolution. 

 

Just admit it you go off and believe what you want to then get upset because not everyone else is as easily convinced as you. 

 

Regarding the shroud and paint issue it wasn't evidence of a Religious nature that was presented to you but of your own discipline of choice .. that is SCIENCE.  The evidence and proof that the shroud did not have paint on it was Scientific yet because it doesn't conform to your desires you choose not to accept it.  So if you are going to inject evolution into this at least get my objection to it correct.

What I believe bothers you is that I have a reason to believe as I do, I have a basis of my belief and what I accept.  You on the other hand seem to be going on second hand information from someone you have decided to put your total faith in.  No matter if it's Dawkins or Darwin or your high school teacher or college professor your belief comes from what you accept from another human.  If though you have gone out and done your own scientific observations, published your own papers and come to your decision based upon your own material and work then please cite it for us and I'll retract what I said about you placing your total faith in the work and beliefs of others.

You religious nitwits are really sad with you "scientific" evidence. You know nothing of science and seem to like keeping it that way. The willfully ignorant are truly beyond hope.

Now "rum mama" (wink wink), why would you even want to save the heathens? Less people in heaven means more heaven for you. You can be your god's right hand man and help him run the show. What's worse-a hateful "old atheist heathen" or a hateful judgmental "old christian"? 

Try it again Jimi and maybe you can form the sentence correctly to say what you are thinking. 

 

And you aren't without hope Jimi you just appear hopeless at times but others in this political correct society just call it "special".   I still think you make a great poster boy for atheism, liberals,  and public education as you do all three proud. 

 

 

 

 

I think the boy is just badly retarded.

You don't appear to know any other adjectives. Would you like to borrow a thesaurus?