During a program that allowed comments from people on the street, one individual was asked what can be done to stop crime. The response was to accept Jesus Christ as Lord and be baptized. An individual who was viewing the program with me regarded the answer as stupid and declared that nations that do not believe in Christianity fare better when it comes to crime.
This person cited Muslim nations where one does not find drunks all over the street; and nobody is arrested for DUI or killing while DUI. Incest is unacceptable as is unwed motherhood[which often results from rape or incest]. Stealing is not tolerated nor is 'affairs' which seem to dominate the Western society headlines. Nobody is fired for inappropriate wear at the office.
This person asked why in countries that expound Christianity as lifechanging why Christians especially do not live what they believe to be so good? What are your comments considering that what this person has said is so true?Some Christians stand in the way of sinners!
Have you had a look at crime statistics recently, or are you basing this entirely on your television viewing habits?
The response was that of a Christian fanatic in a secular society, much like the response of a Muslim or Hindu fanatic would sound similar in those societies.
Here are some figures regarding murder per capita in a given nation: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_m … per-capita
If we were to take murder as one of the worst crimes (which it certainly is), the numbers here are interesting. The countries with failed political systems, or where the political system is ineffective have the highest crime rates. Dictatorships, be they religious or secular, tend to have low crime rates, and countries with fairly functioning systems fall in the middle (but VERY far below the failed states).
Religion simply doesn't enter into it. I would, however, state that I am firmly against religion in all its forms, since it seems only to nurture the worst in us, and tends to hide the best aspects of humankind.
Can ya explain what'cha mean by the title of your hub question: "Are christians nations better or worse than non-christian nations"
Better or worse? What's better? what's worse?
When it comes to crime, are the statistics for nations that promote Christianity lower or higher? How does Christianity impact the society? Is the influence positive[better] or negative [worse]? Then compare the answer to the first part of the explanation to non-Christian countries or nations.
I hate to say it but i think non christian, non Muslim and non Jewish nations are better. there three religions tend to stir up alot of controversy. there tends to be alot of violence in nations that practice these faiths. I'm not judging i'm just stating my opinion. :-)
there are no christian nations, the christians in the nations that are suspose to be a christian nation has allready turned from god. the christians in these nations are sitting back and letting the nation do what ever it wants to, like taking prayer out of school, people moving to this nation know it is suspose to be a christian nation, so why are we letting the government take god out of everything, there is not enough true christians in the united states to turn all this around, so we need to try and be ready
Ready for what? There will not be a religious war found on American soil. A Racial one, maybe, but certainly not a religious one.
The U.S. exercises a person's individual right to freedom of religion. That means, you can follow whatever religion you feel like following. If you choose to not follow a religion, such as Christians do, then that is your right to do so as well.
As for other Nations, that supposedly are Christian, then they have their problems too. And, I will not speak about them.
I will however defend my life, against any religious nut, who has delusions of forcing people to pray in schools. I will defend their right to choose for themselves. In America, there is a reason for the separation of church and state. Why? Because religion based on the god concept is false, and if more people realized it, then the perceived notion is chaos will ensue.
But, that's another story altogether. Do yourself a favor and everyone else, stifle the religious garbage for your own personal life. Keep it out of other people's life. Leave the choice to them, because you have no right to do otherwise.
Just my thoughts.
Yes Islamic nations probrably do have less crime in general.
It would seem to me the more you supress and deny rights and freedoms to individuals to think and act as they want, the more you can accomplish control with more effiecency.
Being opressed under Islamic Shari'a would certainly depress the crime rate.
But then there is the issue of what is a crime. Homosexuality? Adultery?
IDK... you tell me.
Less crimes does not necessarilly mean a better country to live in.
All countries have different types of people in them; so it is wrong to attribute them to one religion; for instance America; is it a Christian nation?
I think there will be many here who would deny to name America as a Christian nation. Am I right?
I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim
I am guessing here but I don't think this is a issue comparing Christian verses non Christian nations.
I bet ya a nickel that where crime is lowest it is because the laws are enforced diligently.
You do not lower crimes by making more laws.
Ya lower crime by enforcing the laws that you have.
I don't know but that seems like that is the way it works.
Prisons should be full of murderers, rapists, instead of letting them out early to make room for someone who was caught for committing lesser crimes.
There is no such thing as a Christian nation, though some are trying to turn the U.S. into one.
Good point. How are they doing in the world cup by the way?
Using VC as an example may provide an answer to the OP's question. How many secular nations institutionalize the rape of little boys and the protection of the perpetrators?
Good question. A nation may not be 'Christian' per se; but how many times have you seena program promoting Mohammed,Buddha or revered religiious leaders?
I understand that in order to bridge the gap between Christian and Muslim nations, the Vatican and Saudi Arabia officials recently organized a party.
In gestures of bridge building and friendship, each delegation invited 'special' guests they thought would be welcomed by the other side and 'spice things up' at the party.
Evidently the party ended in a HUGE fight, as the intent of these gestures was misunderstood by both sides. It just goes to show you that the cultural divides run deep...
The Vatican's invitees...
Saudi Arabia's special guests....
There is a distinction to be made here. Namely, between secular countries with a religious majority and theocracies.
In the case of the Vatican, I believe Ron's point still stands. It is a nation only in name. It saps Italy of funds by leeching tax revenue from the state. As far as I can tell, it functions only at the whim of Italian contemporary culture (which is rapidly changing) and through its investments.
I am of the view that Theocracies are inherently destructive. To progress, to humanity and to thought. I don't feel like spewing out two thousands words defending this principle, but it seems well grounded to me.
As for secular countries that house religious majorities -- as long as freedom FROM religioun is respected as well as freedom of religion, there can be healthy debate.
In reply to the OP, I find it odd that the person you refer to who chose to champion the crimelessness of muslim countries sees no crime in their oppression of the people.
Unwed mothers, drunkeness, inappropriate clothing at the office, these are crimes?!!! Laughter, rock-n-roll, and bikinis?
Is blowing up buildings full of people a crime? Is murdering your sister because she got raped by the man down the street a crime? Is forcing a woman to be a nonentity a crime? The suppression of peoples' own sexual choices a crime?
Look I'm not anti-muslim, not at all. And I sure as shooting ain't pro-christianity.
But I am for countries who value the freedoms of their people. I'd much rather deal with higher petty crime rates then live in an orderly and peaceful but oppressed society.
Unwed motherhood is fornication- a sin. Drunkenness and inappropriate dressing is intemperance and immodesty. What is the difference between blowing up a building and a drunk driver[ or sober one] who has a head on collision and kills families or a person who opens fire during a family gathering because he wanted to revenge the hurt provided by his estranged wife [or her lover].
Ron…you are sooo right…I’m gonna vote fer ye now...don't care what you're running for.
Of course there would be less crime in any religious environment or society. America has unconsciously proven this fact. We need only look back in history when America accepted Judeo Christian teaching. The streets were safer to walk on. The most trouble they had in school during that time. Approximately the 50s were kids playing in the hallways and chewing gum, nothing like Columbine and the other public-school systems where violence has taken innocent lives.
Laws cannot bring about peace or how many times have people been harassed, murdered and the perpetrator knowing full well they were under a restraining order? It has been said prisoners that come out of these incarcerated systems simply becomes a revolving door.
A society is less likely to have crime if the individuals have embraced the teachings of morality. When one doesn't have to be watched by cameras and when that person takes responsibility for their own actions because these actions are in violation of their moral beliefs then they will refrain from murdering, raping, torturing, etc. telling someone what they should or shouldn't do does not keep them from doing it, they must believe in something or someone greater than themselves to keep them from doing evil.
This is a pure opinion response - not one statistic. Prove this.
To answer your arguments succinctly in reverse order:
3. You're advocating brainwashing over freedom to pursue thought (including religion) within a legal system. Furthermore, you're stating that nations without strong enforcement of laws but with strong religious influence are more peaceful than vice-versa. Wrong. See above, as well as crime statistics in strongly religious countries.
Another point: the inquisition. Wouldn't have been needed if people cannot be in violation of their moral beliefs.
2. If laws cannot bring about peace, how can religious laws do so; laws that are enforced by a church instead of a state? Ignoring the paradox for a minute: you cannot point two one or two special cases and state that this is a fact. Back to the paradox: religion is still law. It's just so deeply ingrained through brainwashing that it appears not to be. The control methods used are much more vicious than those for normal laws.
Other points regarding this: Inquisition, crusades, religious terrorism, religious violence.
1. A proven fact is one which has statistical evidence behind it. The reason the crime rate was so low not only in the US, but in every country involved in WWII is twofold:
A. The war had just happened, and people were far too busy rebuilding their lives.
B. An entire swath of generations had been killed in the war, leading to necessarily reduced crime.
That said, the 1950's as well as the 1960's were the time of the birth of the hippie and new age movements, which were either wholly unconcerned about religion or focused more on the naturalistic than the patriarchal aspects of religion.
Funny that, in reality, the more religious the society, the more crime it produces. America has consciously proven this fact.
Believers have this notion that they must be told not to go and murder, rape or torture others, clearly due to the fact that they can't figure this out for themselves, a result of losing all capacity to think and rationalize due to childhood religious indoctrination. And, since it is indoctrination that got them into this mess in the first place, one can only take pity on them for their childhood misfortune and hope someday they break the slavery of their cults stranglehold and start to think for themselves so that they too will understand why we don't just go out murdering, raping, etc.
In answer to your question, I believe it is not for us to judge! Thank you
You sound young to me, I'm guessing you weren't around during the 40s or 50s.
Your writing did bring laughter not in a mean way it's just from my point of view you were trying to create logic which could actually work to your reasoning.
First of all if you go back in your history books especially before religion because a serious factor look at how absolutely selfish and evil men were. Morality comes from religion the laws we have today came from religous teachings.
Let's take a child today is it better to teach that child the laws of the land, let them go out on their own because they're moral beings OR introduce them to religous concepts that say it's not good to steal, kill, lie cheat and all the rest?
Can't ever be sure what you're trying to say Mr. Mark Knowles but I'm sure you'll get around to conveying relevant point some time soon.
I already did. Apparently you are too young to understand English.
Segregation and Atomic bombs - do you speak it? (you know - 40s and 50s) LOLOLO
Oh yeah - too difficult to unerstan. LOLOL
You mean Iwo Jima and Hiroshima as well as the napalm bomb?Segregration is still going on but with the President being biracial creates an interesting and unexpected turn of events.Some people do not like the black half and others wonder how his white half thinks! Some people did not want him to be inaugaurated and questioned his citizenship as an American. Seema like America still has a long way to go!
Mark's point is as obvious as a baseball bat across the forehead. If someone hasn't figured it out by now, then...
I have say whenever there's agitation, irritation you 2 are usually around. May a talk with a pychologist would draw the 2 of you from the darkside.
Yeah, you two just need to go see a shrink, or a, a....
That'll fix ya!
The last priest I spoke with held his head in shame after our lengthy discussion as to why he loved his wife yet believed she was unworthy of being saved, simply because she was a female.
wow, where on earth did you unearth this priest. the last priest I talked to was a jesuit...and he said:
there are many historical proofs that Jesus existed..as for G-d, those questions are very disturbing indeed. But you must venture in that unknown for in your journey you will find yourself.
i have no idea where you get your priests, Q and now I'm not surprised.
Funny how you automatically assume your superiority of us by claiming we are from the "darkside"
Everything we argue is in favor of humanity and mankind while everything believers argue are against humanity and mankind and completely in favor of a variety of invisible and undetectable gods, all the while praying fervently for the end of days.
I can only conclude that the "darkside" is the saving of humanity while the believers side is it's timely and forthcoming destruction.
This is what I'm talking about Mark, you're reading English from me and then you're asking if I speak English- truly I think you need to talk to someone who can help you out with maybe your vision also.
Tell us all the noble and wonderful things you've done to stop rape, crime, jail house over crowing, making the street safer for all Americans assuming you are an American.
I'm personally holding my breath because for someone that does a lot of acussing of others you must have a lot to present to the rest of so we can follow that great example of improving relationships in the world.
Haven't you noticed that's exactly what Mark is doing, trying to improve the world?
So - atomic bombs and segregation was gud then?
Disgusting religion. No morals. I guess you were not around in the 40s and 50s then? Too young to understand the value of segregation.
I wasn't around until the mid 1960's, Mark, so I hardly feel responsible for segregation either.
As long as people choose to commit crime, there will be crime regardless of local. I do however wonder if crimes are as rampant in Amish type communities where the societal mesh is steeped in religion?
Of course the next volley will no doubt involve perverted priests.
The Amish police themselves, primarily. Of course, when Charles Roberts opened fire on his Amish brethren back in 2006, he committed suicide before being captured. The victims families were sympathetic he did that as they believe he wasn't able to repent and seek salvation for his crimes.
Oh Q, key word in my statement was RAMPANT. You pointed out a single incident.
I would also think it possible the perpetrator may have been depressed or mentally ill. It seems their society would be subject to mental illness although it isn't addressed much.
Oh, I see, if crime isn't 'RAMPANT' within a religious society, then it's all good? The odd mass murder isn't going to hinder anyone from joining a cult?
Have you noticed, Holly, that is what is assumed about with most cult members.
Like I said before, they police themselves, they are a closed society, Holly. And again, the same could be said about any cult groups members.
Think about it, cult members believe the invisible and undetectable are swirling with ghouls and goblins ready to pounce on them. Silly, isn't it? Must be mental illness.
I see you still like to twist words. Any idiot could see that I did not state crime less than rampant was acceptable anywhere.
Every person whether they are religious or not is at risk for mental illness.
As usual discussion with you is seriously hindered with your holier than thou attitude. Such a shame you fail to discuss the topic preffering to denigrate things you obviously have no capacity to understand.
Then, did you actually have a point to your statement? What was the point?
The religious believe their mental illness is their connection to god. Everyone else usually seeks treatment.
You see, you always move towards insulting me personally and then claim I am the one being the troll. Ah, the hypocrisy of believers, never ending.
Are Christian Nations better or worse than Non-Christian Nations?
What countries consist of the Christians nations? I don't think there is any; mostly their constitutions are secular; so how could these be named as "Christians"? Is America a Christian nation country?
I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim
I do not feel "responsible" either - but I am not desperate enough to defend my irrational beliefs by lying to myself that it did not happen and things were much better when we were more religious as a society.
I have yet to see anyone show me that any time in history was better than now thanks to the fact that we are "less religious".
Remember - fight on the side of the believers - no matter what they are saying.
Which one is better? The one that learns from both the Christian nations and the non religious nations instead of repeating their same mistakes.
I'm Still Waiting....
Sure you've blame everyone else for something and I haven't heard from you what shining example you have set for the rest of us???
SpanStar, I have to say your method of argumentation is quite something. First you describe me as infantile, and say that I appear to be twisting arguments to suit my needs, then you don't even answer Mark Knowles's simple, very lucid questions.
And then you disappear in a huff, because your food is getting cold.
I can only join Mark in LOLing.
Number one I waited long enough for Marks reply but frank I don't have all day for him to have to come up with some sort of reply. I'm glad you mentioned that I didn't answer Mark's question and making no mention of the questions I asked him which he did not reply to and if you should go to my hub titled. For The Believers you'll find your good friend has found that hub of mine and left a message cursing God.
No I don't have time for Mark so you can go with him where the 2 of you go.
Are Christian Nations better or worse than Non-Christian Nations?
Is America a Christian nation country?
It is not about Christianity and more about scientific developments which has made nations prosper..take any golden era of any nation and one can bet that science was flourishing during that era..
The more natural a life a religion lays out for a follower the more better he is. The snag with Christianity is that it is too forcing. The condition for being a faithful and a claimant of paradise becomes after the faithful accepts Jesus Christ as God or Son of God, without that he is doomed.
The entarnt to this faith is in worst shape, since he is lax and redicules Jesus and openly speaks against him and there is no immediate penalisation to him. The intellectual superiority of the Prophets he is not ready to accept that is he does not know the domain of intellectualism and he is poor off.
The freedom with compability to accessibility to a faith without a burden on self and with logic at work behind the fundamentals of faith makes the follower best, if it is available and worst if not.
The Christian nation deny themselves of God's blessings. One of them is polygamy. They are ready to become polygamist by the nature of their act by trampling law of ethics and make illegitimate relations, but not a legitimate relation of owning more than one wife or a wife on temporay terms - called Mutah.
The human is sent to enjoy in the God's world with in the bounds of ethics and good behaviour with spirituality knocking at his door and every act he does becomes a blessing.
Oh dear me.
YOU, a man, might consider it a "blessing" to get to have multiple wives! LOLOL and wouldn't most men??!!
Let me say this----IF the average man (no, IF ANY man!) was self-controlled enough, Godly enough, and equipped both physically (strong enough to work and support all those wives and kids) and monetarily to handle multiple wives, then I could see it being legitimate to do so.
But there is NO man with that kind of mental, physical, and Spiritual fortitude.
And you apparently forget that America is NOT a Mormon nation either. And while SOME wives might like the idea of sharing her husband with other "wives", I'd say the majority of us would not. God didn't make 3 or 4 Eves for Adam; he made ONE. Just because the kings in the Bible had multiple wives doesn't mean God condones that. There are many things God "winked at" (ignored temporarily) in those days. Not so today.
Another priest said this:
Me: I got the gnostic gospels book with me.
Priest : May I borrow it? It was a great discussion in my theology class
Me: Father, why do you not teach these things if you know them?
Priest : These things are not important to a lot of people. Most people just need to know how to be moral. But for people who seek beyond the surface of faith, we explain. There are different levels of understanding and in a sermon, you can only talk about things that are applicable to their daily life.
He's not stupid...but then again. He's a Jesuit, the Jewish equivalent of a Chassidic Rabbi.
Polygamy God allowed out of necessity and the condition was equal treatment with each wife out of the means available. The necessity of polygamy revolved round the hale and hearty and it was incumbent on the marrying to carry out the function of the married life.
God created Adam and Eve and they paired up and Adam was not hit by the necessity of another Eve. Since such necessities did not arise in his time and the Prophets were above desires. We see the Prophets married more than one wives for political and social reasons rather than any uncontrolled instinct they could have. Polygamy is perfectly workable and is a reformer of the society.
Back to the original question, whether Christian nations are better or worse than Non-Christian nations ...
Short answer: I don't think it's really been tried.
Now let's flip this badboy over on its side: Are Christians better in a (predominately) Christian nation than a non-Christian nation?
My answer is no. Take a Christian in a country where such faith is uncommon and preaching the Gospel is illegal. He's gonna be tough, battle-hardened. He'll say what he means & mean what he says. He's going to take his faith seriously. He'll be hot or cold. There's no room for compromise or hypocrisy.
Not so here in the United States. In this nation that allows freedom of religion, the Christians can get comfortable. Consequently they have a high lukewarm quotient. No wonder there's such a disconnect between what a Christian says and what he does.
It is not Realistic to consider Christianity as expressed in our communities as truly Christianity. It is more a business than a Spiritual life or following. So, to render a judgement as to whether Christian countries have more or less crime than other countries is ludicrous. The United States is a God-given Christian country. She does not, however, live a Christian life at this time. The confusion and frustration of people's souls leads them to criminal behavior. If and when the populace of this country returns to its True Christian roots, you will find that crime will no longer be an issue. There will be Peace on our streets.
by Castlepaloma 7 years ago
Most predominate religious countries are more war like, yet Religions claim they have the higher moral grounds. USA has 5% of the world population in which is 85% Religious and they have 50% of the world’s military budget. Nuclear war is the greatest threat to mankind and the USA has enough to...
by Cassie Smith 6 years ago
Christianity has shifted from its concentration in Europe and America to spread to Asia and Africa according to the Pew Research Center. It used to be that 93% of Christians could be found in Europe (66.3%) and the Americas (27.1%) Now, that 93% is split up among the four corners of the...
by Josh Ratzburg 3 years ago
Is Kim Davis making Christian's look better or worse?I find this fascinating, because being a Christian, I think she is making "us" look terrible. I grew up in a Lutheran School all the way through High School, I try to follow the Golden Rule more than any others: Do unto other what you...
by Jack Lee 20 months ago
In discussion here on hubpages, we hear some accuses religion people of being judgemental and more over accuses religious people of forcing their believes and policies on the American people through laws...That is not the religion or people I know. Where is this disconnect coming from?Could it be...
by Claire Evans 23 months ago
This topic is old, I know, but I'd like to ask it anyway. Many Christians will ask an atheist, "Why are you here if you don't believe God (should it be a Christian thread)?" Some will answer, "Because I'm trying to help you see the errors of your ways. Is this...
by fit2day 2 years ago
So you used to be a Christian?Many people claiming atheism, deism, etc. claim they used to be Christians. I could walk down the street and call myself the mayor, but I'm not. On what basis were you a Christian to begin with?
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|