About Me

Name: Jack Fisher
Email: slickboy44@fastmail.fm Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 
Objective Religions Studies
Debunking Creationisms

Making a Moral Person With Religion or Edcuation

Does religion make people good or bad? It seems to be a question that has become far more pertinent in the age of global terrorism. Some argue certain religions make people more malevolent than others. A quick Google search on Islam will yield many websites arguing that it is a religion of violence. Other sites will say the same about Christianity, Judism, Hinduism, or pretty much any 'ism' for that matter. But little of this propaganda has any substance behind it. To answer the question as to whether religion makes someone good or bad, it's important to understand the factors.

First off, what determines how religious or non-religious someone is? Believers of many different faiths will give all sorts of answers. Some may say it is a tradition in their family. Some may say they had a genuine religious experience that drew them to a certain faith. Some may say their faith helps make them a better person. These are all interesting components to the argument, but it isn't evidence one way or another because it's purely anecdotal. To get a better idea of what determines one's religion, it's important to get a broader picture. As it turns out, evidence indicates that there's no godly forces driving people to particular religions. It's culture mostly that determines what religion someone follows.

Religious Affiliation and Cultural Inheritance: Study of Twins

In these studies, the environment one comes up in determines a great deal what they believe. So if someone is born into a Christian community in Texas, chances are they'll be a Christian. If someone is born in a strong Muslim community in the Middle East, chances are they'll be a Muslim. If they're born into a community that is strongly Jewish, chances are they'll be Jewish. There's nothing spiritually radical about it. It's simple social dynamics.

So if religion is mostly determined by environment or culture, what does that mean for a person's morality? The next point to consider in this question involves just how religious someone is. Regardless of what religion they're brought up in, how seriously they take it is important to consider when making a reasonable discussion. If religion is supposed to make someone more moral, than those who attend church services or religious rituals should have a strong correlation with crime. But research does not support this. According to empirical research, attending religious services has no effect on deviance.

Does Religion Effect Criminality?

Again, community and culture played a large part. In communites like Mormon or tight nit religious communities in smaller more isolated areas, low levels of deviance were associated with strong social pressures and peer groups that dissuaded such activities. This is further supported by the religious affiliation of the prison population. If one religion led to more deviance than others, then it should reflect in theose in jail. But it doesn't. According to the Justice Department, the religious affiliation of inmates has no particular leanings towards one faith or another.

Prison Incarceration and Religious Affiliation

So if religion doesn't have an effect on one's morality, what does? Is there any research indicating one factor over another? As it turns out, crime rates do have a negative correlation with something: education. Various studies into crime rates have shown that the more educated a population is, the less crime there is. In America, this is well documented:

Education and Public Safety

Education as Crime Prevention

So with this knowledge in mind, what is more reasonable to promote? Religion or education? Religion, it seems, does not offer a correlative effect between how deviant a person is. Education does offer a correlative effect. So logically, education wins out. This is not to say religion has no benefits. But those promoted social demigods has no merit. It offers a much more reasonable explanation when one considers why countries in Western Europe and Japan have such a low rate of deviance. Their education level is far greater compared to that of America, which has a very inefficient government-run heavily unionized system that does not provide adaquet resources for students.

There was one other effect education had that may explain why some don't want to promote it over religion. It turns out that as one becomes more educated, they become less religious.

Education and Religion

So regardless of what one thinks about the merits of religion, it does not seem to make someone more moral and less deviant. There are other factors to consider such as socio-economic status, which often goes along with the environmental aspect that often determines religious leanings. But the research is clear. Good education makes for good people. Religion can be part of the process, but it does not pull the same weight.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Freedom and Decadence

Liberals and social conservatives alike have long lamented on western society being awash in decadence. They see things like sexual promiscuity, rampant consumerism, and popular culture as signs of a decaying society. They often place them (or confuse them) in the same category as deviance. But there is a significant difference between the two. One is a product of a free society and one is the enemy of a free society. But they are not mutually exclusive.
 
Deviance is defined as the violation of set rules and standards of a society. This involves breaking real laws and violating the rights of others. It includes stealing, cheating, violence, and murder. Deviance is more universial because societies throughout history often label the same acts as deviant. Theft in the time of the Ancient Egyptians was just as wrong as theft in modern times. The difference is how society handles it.
 
Decadence, on the other hand, is not nearly as concrete. Decadence is defined as appealing to one's personal self-indulgences. Being decadent involves enjoying something that gives one pleasure, fulfillment, or excitement. Riding on a roller coaster can be a form of decadance and so could eating bar of chocolate or dancing wildly in a club. These acts are not illegal or in violation of any major laws in a free society. Some may be personally destructive like over-eating, doing drugs, and being promiscuous. But they do not infringe on anybody's rights and do not harm society at large.
 
Decadance also depends heavily on societal and cultural influences. Some cultures in the Middle East find a woman not wearing a veil to be decadant and they will punish them for not doing so. In the 1950s it was considered decadant in America to have long hair. The key difference is that America was founded in the spirit of the free society. And in a free society, the state cannot punish decadence or the people cease to be free. It is a part of one's natural rights to life, liberty, and property. The line is only crossed when one person's decadent behavior affects the rights of another.
 
But people in religion and government often fail to understand this. They will preach decadance is the same as deviance and it should be punished as such. Some in religion seek to punish homosexuals for their behavior by robbing them of their rights. Some in governments seek to punish the rich for their behavior by taking their money and forcing them to adhere to 'regulations' which is really just force. But in both instances, it is an afront to freedom and liberty.
 
In any free society, decadence is a natural byproduct. When people have the freedom to pursue whatever it is that makes them happy, they will find ways of pursuing it. Some people's notion of happiness differs from others. There may even be those who have extreme pursuits that most would classify as alternative lifestyles, but they as individuals have a right to pursue their passion without anyone else from the government or society at large to stand in their way. Sometimes people fail in their endeavors, but that's okay because that's another byproduct of freedom. People are free to be decadant just as they are free to fail. That is the essance of liberty.
 
Decadance and deviance are a part of every society. It is how society deals with them that reflect the values of freedom. And when religion and government seek to impose their standards on society at large, they cease to become champions of freedom and become an agent of tyranny.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »