I do see the difference and I do consider it relevant, as I am looking at behaviors on here myself. I question if you are truly trying to understand things, why you do not take into account the more moderate of Christians on the thread. What about those of us you do get along with? Should I take the non-Christians with the worst of attitudes and consider them to be the correct representatives of all non-Christians?<quoted text>
Then we'll just have to agree to disagree.
We have seen how the unbelievers - all humanists, I believe - interact with one another on this thread, and how the Christians treat have treated one another. We've also seen some pretty disgusting behavior from the likes of Dim and now, unfortunately, Juice.
That's my evidence that there is a huge difference between the ideologies of the two camps not just on paper, but in practice. Apparently, you either don't see the difference, or don't consider it relevant.
So the bad behavior of some Christians can represent all of Christianity and its influence in the world, but the bad behavior of some non-Christians does not represent all that are not Christians? I dont think I am following you right<quoted text>
I cannot comment on that without seeing to what you refer.
Even so, my argument is not that all Christians are bad and all unbelievers are good, so an example of an unbeliever acting badly wouldn't be evidence in favor of
The least educated of Christians are the product of places such as hollers, and they tend to be the most radical in my opinion.<quoted text>
Yes, education is a big factor. Christianity fares better in the "hollers" in the mountains of the South than it does in Northern cities, especially a college town like Ann Arbor.
No that would not be my rebuttal. Can you point me in the direction of some statistics when it comes to behaviors broken down by beliefs? Not being sarcastic and I am fully aware of atrocities that have been done in the name of religion. I would like to know if there are dissertations or books that you can recommend that cover this topic in depth?<quoted text>
Once again, I'd need to see what you are talking about. And even then, it's not relevant. I am talking about tendencies, about statistics and trends - the relative behaviors of millions of people considered collectively - not anecdotes of what somebody once did to somebody else. If I told you that Seattle is rainier than Phoenix, would your rebuttal be that you have seen it rain in Phoenix, too?
Can you see what I am getting at? How many Christians are on this thread compared to non-Christians? How is looking at this thread, an honest view of Christians? When I go to atheist threads, I have to deal with that same strife if I want to remain on the thread. Thank you for the exchange as well, whether you realize it or not, wheels are turning on this end.<quoted text>
I think so.
Strife wasn't main point, anyway. Ethics was, and I used the collective behavior of the Christians on this thread compared to the rest of us as a platform to discuss that. Strife in the form of unpleasant words are about all that can occur on a message board. But in meat space, the stakes go way up. Atheists, like gays, have to choose between dealing with that "strife" or remaining closeted.
Thanks for a pleasant exchange.