12-24-2013 03:44 PM
183 ... 5678
tools
  1. anon8126715's Avatar
    Its amazing how religion plays such a big role in elections, even though it plays absolutely no role in real life

    Sent from HTC Note Ultra Pro on T-Mobile
    What's sad is the percentage of American people that aren't religious or are outright Atheist compared to the percentage of politicians that are of like mind. This is one of the reasons that our politicians aren't a good representation of our general population. My guess is the religious lobby has a lot to do that.
    12-19-2013 08:06 PM
  2. SteveISU's Avatar
    Its amazing how religion plays such a big role in elections, even though it plays absolutely no role in real life

    Sent from HTC Note Ultra Pro on T-Mobile

    Thou shall not kill plays no role in real life?
    12-20-2013 09:31 AM
  3. SteveISU's Avatar
    What's sad is the percentage of American people that aren't religious or are outright Atheist compared to the percentage of politicians that are of like mind. This is one of the reasons that our politicians aren't a good representation of our general population. My guess is the religious lobby has a lot to do that.
    Hate to break it to you but 70-80% of Americans classify themselves as Christian. Atheist's make up about 15% of the population.
    12-20-2013 09:53 AM
  4. anon8126715's Avatar
    Hate to break it to you but 70-80% of Americans classify themselves as Christian. Atheist's make up about 15% of the population.
    I know Wiki isn't the definitive source, but at least I cited something. You're off by about 5%-15% according to WIki. And the 70%-80% Christian stat, that would assume that everyone that ISN'T religious is Christian. Much to Fox News' displeasure, I'm sure there are plenty of Islamic, Jewish, and other classes of religion that might have something to say about that stat. Even if we go with your initial figure of 15% of the population, I don't think that amount is being represented in any branch of our government, which is sad when you see all the studies available Religious people are less intelligent than atheists, according to analysis of scores of scientific studies stretching back over decades - Science - News - The Independent

    Encompassing at least agnosticism, atheism, secular humanism, and general secularism,[2] nonreligious Americans have been counted in the tens of millions by various polls.[2][3] Many Americans, especially in the American West, have historically rejected both organized religion and nonreligion, preferring what historians sometimes call "disorganized religion".[4] For example, deists may be religious, though not part of any organized religion.[5]
    A 2008 Gallup survey reported that religion is not an important part of their daily life for 34% of Americans.[6] A 2012 study by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life reported, "The number of Americans who do not identify with any religion continues to grow at a rapid pace. One-fifth of the U.S. public – and a third of adults under 30 – are religiously unaffiliated today, the highest percentages ever in Pew Research Center polling."[7] But being religiously unaffiliated does not mean that a person is not religious in some way; 68% of the religiously unaffiliated say they believe in God.[7]
    Some evidence suggests that the fastest-growing religious status in the United States is "no religion",[8] comprising nearly 20% of the adult public as of 2012.[7] According to the Pew Research Center report people describing themselves as "atheist" or "agnostic" were 6% of the total population in the US, and within the religiously unaffiliated (or "no religion") demographic, atheists made up 12% and agnostics made up 17%.[9] Those who have no religious affiliation are sometimes referred to as "nones".[7][8][10]
    Several groups promoting no religious faith or opposing religious faith altogether – including the Freedom From Religion Foundation, American Atheists, Camp Quest, and the Rational Response Squad – have witnessed large increases in membership numbers in recent years, and the number of secularist student organizations at American colleges and universities increased during the 2000s (decade).[3][11]
    12-20-2013 06:27 PM
  5. Scott7217's Avatar
    Its amazing how religion plays such a big role in elections, even though it plays absolutely no role in real life
    I would be curious to see what would happen if none of the presidential candidates were Christian. For example, let's say one candidate was a Hindu and the other was a Scientologist. How would people vote in that situation?
    12-20-2013 06:53 PM
  6. Tall Mike 2145's Avatar
    I would be curious to see what would happen if none of the presidential candidates were Christian. For example, let's say one candidate was a Hindu and the other was a Scientologist. How would people vote in that situation?
    A lot of Christian groups would probably declare that the U.S. has now completely fallen from favor with God, and it is time for a revolt to overthrow the evildoers who have brought this upon us. Some will probably say the Apocalypse is imminent.
    12-20-2013 07:09 PM
  7. alexlam24's Avatar
    I would be curious to see what would happen if none of the presidential candidates were Christian. For example, let's say one candidate was a Hindu and the other was a Scientologist. How would people vote in that situation?
    How about Muslim and Sciemtologist?

    Sent from HTC Note Ultra Pro on T-Mobile
    12-20-2013 11:16 PM
  8. Scott7217's Avatar
    Some will probably say the Apocalypse is imminent.
    Perhaps people will hold a write-in campaign for a third-party Christian candidate. It doesn't matter what the candidate's political beliefs are. As long as he or she believes in Christianity, that candidate will probably win.
    Tall Mike 2145 likes this.
    12-20-2013 11:56 PM
  9. anon8126715's Avatar
    Perhaps people will hold a write-in campaign for a third-party Christian candidate. It doesn't matter what the candidate's political beliefs are. As long as he or she believes in Christianity, that candidate will probably win.
    Which is sad, it should be the other way around. I'd rather know the candidate's political stance over whether or not he/she worships a Santa Claus-esque character.

    Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk 2
    msndrstood likes this.
    12-21-2013 07:36 AM
  10. palandri's Avatar
    Which is sad, it should be the other way around. I'd rather know the candidate's political stance over whether or not he/she worships a Santa Claus-esque character....
    Until we communicate with aliens that are a million years ahead of us, I think the best you can hope for at this point in time is a stronger separation of church and state.
    msndrstood likes this.
    12-21-2013 07:59 AM
  11. anon8126715's Avatar
    Until we communicate with aliens that are a million years ahead of us, I think the best you can hope for at this point in time is a stronger separation of church and state.
    Or enough people realize that maybe it doesn't matter if there's a higher being out there watching each and every one of us and can read our minds and our intentions, or we make a great discovery that road maps how we came to be.

    At this point, I welcome such a discovery that will hopefully wash away all religion. Don't get me wrong, I like some of the things that religion does, but sometimes I wonder if it does more harm than good. When you look at how much death has come at the hands of religion, some of the hate that religion is responsible for (Just recently demonstrated by a certain character of a certain show that may or may not have something to do with ducks), you can't help but wish for some event that would unite the entire human race. Until that event takes place (if it will ever take place), I think we're doomed to our own devices.
    12-21-2013 08:56 AM
  12. palandri's Avatar
    Or enough people realize that maybe it doesn't matter if there's a higher being out there watching each and every one of us and can read our minds and our intentions, or we make a great discovery that road maps how we came to be.

    At this point, I welcome such a discovery that will hopefully wash away all religion. Don't get me wrong, I like some of the things that religion does, but sometimes I wonder if it does more harm than good. When you look at how much death has come at the hands of religion, some of the hate that religion is responsible for (Just recently demonstrated by a certain character of a certain show that may or may not have something to do with ducks), you can't help but wish for some event that would unite the entire human race. Until that event takes place (if it will ever take place), I think we're doomed to our own devices.
    Since people are still trying to get creationism taught along side science, it will be a long time before the church is separated from politics here.
    msndrstood likes this.
    12-21-2013 09:40 AM
  13. anon8126715's Avatar
    Since people are still trying to get creationism taught along side science, it will be a long time before the church is separated from politics here.
    I know how you feel. The local bible thumpers here (If the TX in my name hasn't already given it away) have already decided to inject their agenda into our schools' curriculum. The way I see it, the states that are pushing this evangelical agenda are generally at the bottom of the list of educational excellence. If that's the case, what does that tell you about this curriculum?

    I personally think the push is mostly geared at trying to secure future votes. If you look at how Obama won, it was mostly younger generations that weren't indoctrinated with a heavy dose of religious teaching. They didn't view abortion or gay rights' agendas through the religious looking glass. And thus when Obama's opponent would say, "I want to limit gay marriage because of my faith, Oh and corporations are people too", I think the younger voters looked beyond the religious rhetoric and focused more on the issues that they thought were more important to them.

    If anything, you have to hand it to the sneaky religious right for at least having a game plan to secure future votes. What better way to gain political traction by teaching a new generation early on that a gay lifestyle or abortion is evil personified? It makes it easier to continue to push a status quo agenda that does nothing to address middle class issues, not that the millionaires on the left are much better, they're just not as organized.
    12-21-2013 10:03 AM
  14. JW4VZW's Avatar
    Add the rest of establishment news to this, if you like.

    XT1060. Through spacetime.
    No joke there! The news is all liberal biased anyway.
    Posted on my Samsung Galaxy Note 3 on Verizon Wireless, America's largest 4G LTE Network. Please excuse any errors.
    12-22-2013 11:20 AM
  15. JW4VZW's Avatar
    And there's this

    Sent from HTC Note Ultra Pro on T-Mobile
    That is funny.
    Posted on my Samsung Galaxy Note 3 on Verizon Wireless, America's largest 4G LTE Network. Please excuse any errors.
    12-22-2013 11:27 AM
  16. anon8126715's Avatar
    No joke there! The news is all liberal biased anyway.
    Posted on my Samsung Galaxy Note 3 on Verizon Wireless, America's largest 4G LTE Network. Please excuse any errors.
    I personally think it's liberal biased because it has to be (although a few entities are deliberately conservative, ad nauseam). Considering we live in a more corporatist society where large corporations for the most part run the show, it would be kind of sad if our media was more rank and file and only cared about the status quo. I personally wish the media was a little more liberal. If the whole Iraq/WMDs, the Obamacare website fiasco, the GMO exempt clause that was secretly inserted into a bill (says no company can be sued for GMO products that prove unhealthy in the future), the keystone pipeline (There are studies that state the pressure used for the sands used for refining is higher because of the nature of the contents and thus causes more leaks) issues were better investigated, I think the public could be better served. But it's all about money. These large media corporations rely on advertising dollars and everything seems to be connected. I'll watch the evening news and will see at least 4 pharmaceutical commercials. So if a media company has a story about a drug maker's unethical behavior, you can see where there would be a conflict of interest. One of the reasons I like supporting NPR, and one of the reasons the GOP is against it I suppose.
    msndrstood likes this.
    12-23-2013 03:47 AM
  17. alexlam24's Avatar
    I have a dream that one day our government won't be more corrupt than North Korea

    Sent from HTC Note Ultra Pro on T-Mobile
    Tall Mike 2145 likes this.
    12-23-2013 12:26 PM
  18. JW4VZW's Avatar
    I personally think it's liberal biased because it has to be (although a few entities are deliberately conservative, ad nauseam). Considering we live in a more corporatist society where large corporations for the most part run the show, it would be kind of sad if our media was more rank and file and only cared about the status quo. I personally wish the media was a little more liberal. If the whole Iraq/WMDs, the Obamacare website fiasco, the GMO exempt clause that was secretly inserted into a bill (says no company can be sued for GMO products that prove unhealthy in the future), the keystone pipeline (There are studies that state the pressure used for the sands used for refining is higher because of the nature of the contents and thus causes more leaks) issues were better investigated, I think the public could be better served. But it's all about money. These large media corporations rely on advertising dollars and everything seems to be connected. I'll watch the evening news and will see at least 4 pharmaceutical commercials. So if a media company has a story about a drug maker's unethical behavior, you can see where there would be a conflict of interest. One of the reasons I like supporting NPR, and one of the reasons the GOP is against it I suppose.
    I think that it's liberal because they are the ones who fund it. I have yet to see a conservative news station, including Fox News where I live. What would be amazing would be for the news agencies to report news, good or bad, without a biased twist on things. Let the viewers draw their own conclusions.
    Posted on my Samsung Galaxy Note 3 on Verizon Wireless, America's largest 4G LTE Network. Please excuse any errors.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I have a dream that one day our government won't be more corrupt than North Korea

    Sent from HTC Note Ultra Pro on T-Mobile
    One can always dream my friend.
    Posted on my Samsung Galaxy Note 3 on Verizon Wireless, America's largest 4G LTE Network. Please excuse any errors.
    12-23-2013 12:39 PM
  19. anon8126715's Avatar
    I think that it's liberal because they are the ones who fund it. I have yet to see a conservative news station, including Fox News where I live. What would be amazing would be for the news agencies to report news, good or bad, without a biased twist on things. Let the viewers draw their own conclusions.
    Posted on my Samsung Galaxy Note 3 on Verizon Wireless, America's largest 4G LTE Network. Please excuse any errors.

    - - - Updated - - -



    One can always dream my friend.
    Posted on my Samsung Galaxy Note 3 on Verizon Wireless, America's largest 4G LTE Network. Please excuse any errors.
    I've heard some people say that Al Jazeera does a pretty good job of reporting the news without injecting commentary. I find it hard to believe that you think Fox News isn't conservative in its slant of the news. NPR and BBC are decent news reporting agencies as well. I still think a news reporting agency will most likely come across as liberal by default because it generally will report on situations that deviate from what is the status quo.
    12-23-2013 12:50 PM
  20. JW4VZW's Avatar
    I've heard some people say that Al Jazeera does a pretty good job of reporting the news without injecting commentary. I find it hard to believe that you think Fox News isn't conservative in its slant of the news. NPR and BBC are decent news reporting agencies as well. I still think a news reporting agency will most likely come across as liberal by default because it generally will report on situations that deviate from what is the status quo.
    I heard that about Al Jazeera. What I said about Fox News was that "I have yet to see a conservative news station, including Fox News where I live." I live in Virginia Beach, and between here and Richmond, where the majority of networks I watch are based out of, Fox News is no more conservative than the other networks. I have been in other areas and yes, Fox News is more conservative there. I guess it depends on where you are. It would be interesting to see how the Fox News Network in DC leans.
    12-23-2013 01:12 PM
  21. anon8126715's Avatar
    I heard that about Al Jazeera. What I said about Fox News was that "I have yet to see a conservative news station, including Fox News where I live." I live in Virginia Beach, and between here and Richmond, where the majority of networks I watch are based out of, Fox News is no more conservative than the other networks. I have been in other areas and yes, Fox News is more conservative there. I guess it depends on where you are. It would be interesting to see how the Fox News Network in DC leans.
    I thought you were referring to the cable news network Fox News, which should be the same since it's essentially the same broadcast. What irritates me about Fox News and MSNBC for that matter (although to be quite honest, MSNBC irritates me more because they saw Fox's formula was successful and just copied it but slanted the opposite direction) is they go out of their way to slant the news to meet their right/left agenda. IMO the news should be just reported, let the viewer decide. You can take a story as simple as a murder and slant it either way to appease your audience. What's truly entertaining though, is when there's a very big polarizing story (like the Duck Dynasty story) and you watch each news organization's take. The really good media companies will just report the events without commentary. But in all honesty, I think we've come to a point where people will take to whatever side aligns with their personal beliefs, which is kind of sad and not very illuminating.
    12-23-2013 02:08 PM
  22. msndrstood's Avatar
    +1 for Al Jazerra and BBC, I also watch France 24 when I can.

    Sent via The Big, Bad, Beautiful Note 3
    12-23-2013 02:14 PM
  23. anon8126715's Avatar
    Since we've somewhat veered off the topic here, I wondered if I might ask (mostly because sometimes I wonder if I'm just overly sensitive or if there's something to it), is it obvious when a news organization has slight leanings towards the right when they address Obama as "Mr. Obama" instead of "President Obama"? The reason I ask is that I remember some people complaining that he isn't legitimately the U.S. President because of where some people believe he was born (birthers of course) and some people just not able to cope with the fact that he was voted into office. When I think back to the 8 years when George W Bush was President, I don't think I ever heard anyone refer to him as "Mr. Bush". It was always "President Bush". Is it just me or is that some sort of veiled attempt at illegitimizing his presidency?
    msndrstood likes this.
    12-23-2013 02:30 PM
  24. llamabreath's Avatar
    Since we've somewhat veered off the topic here, I wondered if I might ask (mostly because sometimes I wonder if I'm just overly sensitive or if there's something to it), is it obvious when a news organization has slight leanings towards the right when they address Obama as "Mr. Obama" instead of "President Obama"? The reason I ask is that I remember some people complaining that he isn't legitimately the U.S. President because of where some people believe he was born (birthers of course) and some people just not able to cope with the fact that he was voted into office. When I think back to the 8 years when George W Bush was President, I don't think I ever heard anyone refer to him as "Mr. Bush". It was always "President Bush". Is it just me or is that some sort of veiled attempt at illegitimizing his presidency?
    I remember them usually just saying 'Bush', which is even more degrading.



    This is a signature.
    12-23-2013 02:51 PM
  25. anon8126715's Avatar
    I remember them usually just saying 'Bush', which is even more degrading.



    This is a signature.
    I hear it's making a comeback though....
    12-23-2013 02:53 PM
183 ... 5678

Similar Threads

  1. On the umi x2 how do you determine what bloatware to remove
    By hoben02 in forum Misc. Android Phones
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-26-2014, 05:09 PM
  2. Anyone choosing the G2 over the Note 3?
    By SCD23x in forum Sprint LG G2
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-31-2013, 11:15 PM
  3. HTC One - Question about the TV app (Cable Box brand)
    By Grant Rosen in forum HTC One M7
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-30-2013, 02:15 PM
  4. Finally Made the Move
    By TomK1965 in forum LG G2
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-30-2013, 09:37 AM
  5. When will the Note 10.1 2014 edition be in Canada
    By n3xtgen in forum General News & Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-30-2013, 05:55 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD