The defense mounting by ridicule artists and character assigns (ie atheist apologists) in the comment section amount to nothing more than a bag of hot air and lot of self deception. The first "major" issue was that I said Zuckerman is claiming "atheist nations" but he actually says "secular." In the original version of the study (not the book, the first study--which I can't find on the net anymore) I believe it did say atheist nation. Even if it didn't how utterly stupid to contend that my argumetns all invalidated because of a label that' is not even sufficiently different from the actual article to mean anything.
Atheist play this kind of knit picking bs word game all the time. There is no significant difference. Nor is there a significant difference in saying that society without God is more content (which is just what the Z man does say in the subtitle of his book) or saying that people can be moral without God.Both are imbecilic claims and are far from bring proved; but they not all that different if you understand Christian assumptions.
The truth of it is my arguments against Sucker, man are devastating. If not why are thes little atheist yappers spending so much time trying to yap at my heals? there are several other issues they did not touch:
(1) you don't answer the adherent's.com pate that says his data can't be used to assertain the percentages of atheists.
(2) you don't say anyting to refute the argument that the religious traditon laid down the values. you have left that compeltely untouched.
(3) you have done absoltuely noting to tranlate the stats of socail wefare into any kind of solid basis for "conentent" or "happiness" or even moreality.
(4) your assertions that lack of certain kinds of crime equal morality is the just the kind laughable little sixth grade analysis I would expect from an atheist moron.
(5) you don't undersatnd the place of religoius riturals in a socity,
you assert your opinon rather than offering evdience and completely ignore the evidence I site pretending it's not there.
(6) It' a well known fact that the Japanese are very intent upon staying connected to their tradistons and they see the festibals as a crucial way to do that.
(7) you also totally ignore the evidence on the new religions of Japan
(8) totally ignore the evidence the growing sense of a need for religious feelings in Sweden,and the evidence specifically sites Pentecostalism as growing.
(9) totally ignored the evdience from the anthology on social reform in Europe which says that there is a new ground breaking understanding of European history that include religious background to the values laid down.
I don't believe the atehist detractors even understand the argument about the background values handed down from religous society that built the social welfare state. Be that as it may the bottom line is you can do a lot with a good welfare state. If I had my way, I'm a social democrat Sweden is my model, I would have a Swedish style welfare state with nationalized medicine and the lot. That is still not going to touch people's deepest needs. that is only material it doesn't effect the spirit.