re: #4 team_fukit

Sorry, but I disagree on your portrayal of the tone. He’s flame-throwing when he writes things like:

In fact, a review of worldwide studies found that criminality and religion go hand in hand. The countries with the most religious people have the highest crime rates, highest sexually transmitted diseases and the highest teen pregnancy rates.

A review? Whose review? “Worlwide studies” carried out when and by whom? Correlation does not imply causation.

Worldwide there are more non-White people than White, so (using his logic) it follows that criminality & religion would likely also be higher among people of color. Should we therefore draw the conclusion that race is also a contributing factor to crime & STDs? Do you see where I’m going with this? That kind of thinking is a slippery slope that can quickly lead to some really nasty stuff.

The pushback here is more against examples like: “Yet in a recent study atheists were believed to be no more trustworthy than rapists.”

Again, Which “recent study”? Who sponsored it? Who conducted it? What were the demographics of the group to whom the questions were posed, and how large was the group? How was the trustworthiness question phrased?

I don’t personally know anyone who has such an extreme view. Does that mean that no one does? No, of course not—I’m 100% sure there are some who would give the same response if asked about Catholics, Jews, Muslims, etc. (which is precisely why I’m asking).

It seems to me that this article is written mostly based on emotion, not reason.