Percentage of atheists in prison

[Gunthr]

also believe that most people want to believe in GOD, because with out GOD then after life is nothing? that cant be so,  -ink

i respect your belief, ink (apparently unlike some atheists here) however, even though i believe in God i don't necessarily believe in an afterlife... nor do I believe everything in the bible is literal fact.  i agree that there is an attraction between human beings and God...  and i believe there is an interaction as well... although it may not be entirely definable.  i do get tired of people who go from door to door with their faith, and tired of people who go from forum to forum as well...

[ink]

Originally posted by Gunthr
i respect your belief, ink (apparently unlike some atheists here) however, even though i believe in God i don't necessarily believe in an afterlife... nor do I believe everything in the bible is literal fact.  i agree that there is an attraction between human beings and God...  and i believe there is an interaction as well... although it may not be entirely definable.  i do get tired of people who go from door to door with their faith, and tired of people who go from forum to forum as well...

  i was gonna stop posting to these types of forums but its like a drug just... cant....  stop...

[lazs2]

ink, you said...

"I don't discount the possibility, but I'll continue to know that there is not until there's some sort empirical evidence. Just because something is possible, doesn't make it reality. It's not saying "There is no God." It's saying, "There is no empirical proof of a God."

This says that you are an agnosic.  you admit the possibility... just as we must admit the possibility of bigfoot or aliens.

To proclaim yourself an athiest is to say that it is not possible.   no wiggle room.

You can't be an "athiest light"    It is a religion... a belief... in fact.. you say the word "believe" and "I believe" often.

A thiest is simply someone who says "I believe that there is a god"

an agonsic is simply someone who says "I don't know if there is a god or not"

An athiest is someone who says "there can be no god"

Otherwise... why have the terms "agnostic" and "athiest" at all??   you make them interchangeble.   you make the words meaningless... in your world... since the words are interchangeable.... the only possible reason to use "athiest" over "agnostic" is agenda...shock value or agenda or some deep seated anger type of thing... the throwing away of all possibility based on faith.

This is easily proven... ask any "athiest" what the difference between an agnostic and an athiest is.    the answers will be nonsensical and laughable.. the real answer is..   athiests have websites and an agenda.

It is the nose ring of thought.... it is useless but it gets attention.  

I also believe that it is mostly a backlash against the imagined and real perversions of belief in god that organized religion fosters.

In that, I sympathize but... I don't want to be a martyr for either of your religions.  the evangilist or the athiest.

lazs

[indy007]

Originally posted by lazs2
ink, you said...

First, It's Indy, not Ink. Ink believes. I do not.
Second, I quoted a dictionary to show you the difference.

I'm using a dictionary.
You're making up your own definitions going by what you feel.

You should get your own T.V. show. Stephen Colbert has made a very successful market for himself by going by his feelings instead of facts.

and I'd be pretty interested in what Agenda I have. All I've ever done on here is champion individual freedoms (religion, guns, hobbies).

[lazs2]

Ok indy...  so tell me.. what is the difference between an athiest and an agnostic in your world?

Are there degrees of athiesm?  I know some have absolute faith that there can not be a god...

What is your defenition?

here is random house..

a•the•ist    (�‚thŽ ist)  n.a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings. [1565–75; < Gk áthe (os) godless ( a-A-6 + -theos,adj. der. of theósgod) + -IST]— a�the•is‚tic, a�the•is‚ti•cal  adj.— a�the•is‚ti•cal•ly  adv. — yn. ATHEIST, AGNOSTIC, INFIDEL refer to persons not inclined toward religious belief or a particular religious faith. An ATHEIST denies the existence of a deity or of divine beings. An AGNOSTIC believes it is impossible to know whether there is a God without sufficient evidence.

you will note that you have to deny that it is possible for a god to exist to be an atheist....

This is the only way it makes sense... otherwise you can't define agnostic and atheist in the same breath...

because... by your defenition they are exactly the same.

lazs

[SaburoS]

Originally posted by Chairboy
This is an interesting bit of data:

http://www.freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Percentage_of_atheists

The percentage of atheists in prison is quite a bit lower than the percentage in the population.

Any theories?

Just some thoughts to consider as I consider it somewhat slanted considering the website.
It is based on one year, 1997. Just a snap shot.
What about the trends of every 5-10 years?
Do these include all prisons in the US?
Were these inmates self labeled as atheist when they committed their crime?
Perhaps they changed their label as maybe they are trying to dishonestly get out early on parole?
Are all those listed truly guilty of what they were charged with?
How about the Agnostic population? None were listed.
Budists?
American Indian is a religion? Could some of them be Agnostic or Atheist?

The following religions have a smaller prison population than Atheists, does this make them 'better'?
          o Hindu 119 0.159%
          o Santeria 117 0.157%
          o Sikh 14 0.019%
          o Bahai 9 0.012%
          o Krishna 7 0.009%

Why did you really start this thread?

[SaburoS]

Originally posted by indy007
No, because I don't believe in any type of supreme being or deity. I'm pretty skeptical. I haven't seen anything that said "God exists because.." that isn't readily debunked. Especially one that's put forward by any of human's works (bible, koran, etc). It's shennanigans.

I don't discount the possibility, but I'll continue to know that there is not until there's some sort empirical evidence. Just because something is possible, doesn't make it reality. It's not saying "There is no God." It's saying, "There is no empirical proof of a God." The second statement is obviously correct, and the first one simply an assumption (making it the religion you're so found of). So in the end, I'm still an Athiest. Lacking solid evidence, there is no god.

snip

Actually your definition fits being an Agnostic. An Atheist denies the existence of God. That includes the 'possibility' of the existence of God. If you don't discount the possibility, that infers that it could be possible. Atheists don't even think it's possible for the existence of God.

[indy007]

You're both wrong, don't have time to explain at the moment. I'll jump on it in the morning.

[SaburoS]

Originally posted by indy007
You're both wrong, don't have time to explain at the moment. I'll jump on it in the morning.

Perhaps I am. I'm just looking into your "I don't discount the possibility" part of your statement. I could be wrong in reading too much into it.

[lazs2]

indy... I don't think that both of us are wrong if you try to define agnostic and atheist in the same breath.

You simply can't do it without a lot of mental tapdancing... have the courage of your faith and admit you are one of the faithful or admit you are an agnostic...

there is no shame in being an agnostic... it just doesn't get the hate or agenda or coolness across as well..

Things go downhill for your defenition of "atheist" pretty quickly too when you look at the numbers....

If only 6% of the population is atheist... and you define atheist in your wishy washy manner as someone who thinks it is possible that there is a god.. then that would mean the you are a very tiny minority... lumping agnostics in with atheists puts theists..  true, faith based believers, in a whopping majority of 94% with the remaining 6% ready to convert at the drop of a hat.

and chair... as subaru points out... Your agenda is pretty transparent so why not have a more honest crusade?

lazs

[indy007]

busy morning. found out yesterday I'm moving.

short version, knowledge is provisional. that means it can be wrong. in fuzzy logic, god does not exist would be a .9, so I accept that. Yes, it can be wrong. There are no absolute truths. god existing would be a .1. an atheist accepts that .9 knowing it can be wrong, but is likely not. an agnostic accepts that .1 and takes it to be absolute.

[moot]

An agnostic finds neither .1 nor .9 but a null value.  Neither absence nor presence of God is provable nor disprovable, THEREFORE accepting either as true or false to any degree is a leap of faith.

[Chairboy]

Lazs2, I've never tried tapdancing, but if it's anything like having a seizure while trying to stand up (as it looks), I'll pass.  

You never clarified the name of your religion that denys that a 6 foot tall anthropomorphic rabbit lays plastic eggs full of candy on Easter.  Or are you a believer of the more intellectually honest "Maybe the easter bunny exists" faith?

[JB88]

the easter bunny is 5'9.   (at least around here he is...)

[moot]

Chairboy you keep bringing in those faulty analogies.  The spaghetti monster doesn't seem to exist on our Earth, as far as the vast majority of the population has reported, and as far as science has established to a minuscule margin of error, but that doesn't invalidate God.  God isn't some freakin easter bunny or any sort of anthropomorphist alegory of the infinite, it's by principle, if it exists indeed, in that last tiniest margin of possibility, which we couldn't prove or disprove until we ourselves were infinite, omniscient.

It's a philosophical notion and obviously it and the cheshire cat from alice in wonderland are not the same thing in nature.