Religion (Christianity or Islam anyway) makes kids meaner

This is honestly the first time someone has so ... well ... objected to the idea of club goods being separated from charity giving. I wonder if it's because civ would rather think of them in terms of 'operating costs'?

I dunno. If I go to a dinner with $100 plates and then find out that setting up the even cost $90 per head, I'd say it's fundamentally different to insist I gave $100 to charity. We're merely seeing that as a 90% operating cost, and ignoring that it's money being spent on myself?
 
Whiners said:
Religion makes kids meaner.

That should be translated into: "Having principles and making judgments makes kids meaner."

There, now it is fixed.
 
I'm boggled that there's this communication barrier.
There isn't one. Based on what I've seen here (CFC) I've come to the conclusion that Civman110 is not a real personality.
 
I think the obvious problem with this study's premise is that since religiousness is the more default nature of being raised other endogenous influences are impacting the statistical results. Non-religious households are more likely to come from richer/more well educated households and therefore are often more exposed to concepts like human rights, have a lesser need for selfishness, and have less vested in the negative concepts of tradition. I would be more interested in the results if they were to use some sort of instrumental variable to control for household wealth
 

As much as I would like to trumpet American exceptionalism, I think we have to recognize that American will win top marks in charity by virtue of having the most opportunity. We are among the wealthiest in the world and a rather low cost of living compared to most of the developed world. Our ability to contribute to charity is as much a function of our tax rates, economic prowess, and other things as it is a function of our religion.

I am not disagreeing with you. Call it agreement with a caveat.
 
That should be translated into: "Having principles and making judgments makes kids meaner."

There, now it is fixed.
Not sure how you jump from "being religious" to "having principles"; but ymmv.
 
Religion basically teach people to accept an arbitrary self-claimed absolute truth as being so without evidence, and abrahamic religions in particular teach they're not only the absolute truth, but everyone else is damned.

Who would have thought that stunting critical thinking and endoctrinating people would make them more narrow-minded and less tolerant !
 
One thing I'm wondering about this "study" is if there is a difference between cultures and religions. All cultures and religions are lumped into the same group as if they all behave the same and they don't. It also doesn't say how many people were from each country. Seems like a very weird way to do a study.

"Almost 1,200 children, aged between five and 12, in the US, Canada, China, Jordan, Turkey and South Africa participated in the study. Almost 24% were Christian, 43% Muslim, and 27.6% non-religious. The numbers of Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, agnostic and other children were too small to be statistically valid."

So we have (almost) 1,200 children from 6 countries. That does seem like a rather small study group to base any statistically significant conclusions on.
 
Yes, I'd much prefer it if they were from the same country so we have a common culture as a baseline. As it is, majority of nonreligious children will likely be from China which is of course entirely different from North America. Same for Jordan/Turkey probably.
 
Not sure how you jump from "being religious" to "having principles"; but ymmv.

It is easy once you realize that holding people accountable is part of their definition of being "mean". In order to be nice, one is not allowed to make any judgments and must tacitly approve of whatever others do, think, or say.
 
It is easy once you realize that holding people accountable is part of their definition of being "mean". In order to be nice, one is not allowed to make any judgments and must tacitly approve of whatever others do, think, or say.

Hmmmn, no, that's not what was being tested.

I could be nice, and just tacitly approve of what you say, in order to not be mean.

But no, you jumped to a conclusion. One test was whether children would anonymously share. The second was whether they cared about someone else being hurt.

Page 3 of this document.
 
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven.

Wait a sec, Jesus is "your Father who is in heaven"?
 
Back
Top Bottom