Huh? Are you serious? Where did you get these 'facts' from and what religion are you talking about, there's more than one religion, ya know. There's also many, many more ways than charity work to be a good person. A lot of people who do charity work are just doing it because they've been ordered to by law (community service), tax evasion, and other self-serving reasons.
"The statistically verifiable reality should come as no surprise to those who have first hand experience with criminal and religious sociology:
1. The majority of Americans (85%) have a stated religious preference.
2. The majority of American prisoners (between 80 and 100%, depending on the study consulted) also have a stated religious preference"
So 85% of Americans are religious and around 80% of American prisoners are religious? Isn't that kind of... obvious? Not to mention, you deride his lack of facts and then state that most people involved in charity are doing it for "self-serving reasons", without backing that up. Just saying.
Not that I agree with dom180 either, as I haven't found any evidence to back that up. I stand by my initial statement that religion has no direct correlation with good or bad citizenship. There are good and bad people in any group.
And I didn't say 'most people', I said 'a lot of people'.
I can provide information to back this up, although as for court-ordered community service, it's going to be tough to provide exact specifics as the laws and sentences vary so widely from state to state. We can do an average though. Let's take DUI's, that's one of the more common arrests that net a sentence for community service.
"The total number of hours of community service that a person can be ordered to perform varies from state to state and also depends on the conditions of the arrest. Some states require a minimum sentence of at least 50 community service hours for a first-time conviction. In other states, the sentence for a first-time conviction can be as little as 24 hours or as much as 100 hours.
Repeat offenders receive harsher penalties. For third time offenders, it is possible to be ordered to serve anywhere from 150 to 600 hours. This, of course, is in addition to other fines, penalties, and jail time"
DUI arrests by state for 2008: http://www.numberof.net/number-of-dui-arrests-per-state/
So, use those figures to make a reasonable conclusion. Littering and graffiti are also commonly dealt with by a sentence to community service. Look at your state's laws, you can see the sentencing guidelines for any given crime.
I got 24 hours of community service for an APC, and when I've been to court I've personally seen numerous people get sentenced to hours. Go sit in on court and watch, it's open to the public. When you've 'been there' you can pretty much recognize who is just putting in their time, and who's there for charity. VERY obvious.
Go to Charity Watch to see how charities spend their money, many have bad ratings. Charity Watch breaks it down by how much of your money goes to salaries, solicitation, and actual aid to people in need.
Obvious? Yes and no. One could think that the 15% that don't claim a religion are the ones in prison, but that's not the way it is. It's the religious folks that are in prison. I pointed that out because it's one of the only solid statistical facts to support the theory that religious people aren't 'better ctizens'.
Exactly, but it was worded such that it seemed to try to imply a connection between "criminal and religious sociology", when really, it's an incredibly obvious statistic. I'm sure 80% of people who buy orange juice are religious too. There is no categorical connection between the two. That's my only point.
It's not exactly obvious though. If religious people were better citizens, then they would make up a lower percent of prison population.
It's all about proportions.
Men make up roughly 50% of the population, but about 92% of the prison population. Are you saying you can't draw conclusions from that? I don't see how you can't connect the whole proportional thing. If religious people were 'better' then they'd have a disproportionately lower number of inmates as compared to the general population.
You clearly didn't read what I wrote - I'm arguing against the idea that religion has any effect on being a better person. We're agreeing. Please go back and read my comment.
Don't a lot of priests and ministers go around prisons? And once you've been sentenced to jail you might be looking for some forgiveness! I don't think the number of religious peoples in prisons vs non-religious is a fair statistic to use.
The statistics come from intake forms. So, yes, it is fair to use. Yes, some people convert or 'find' religion in prison, but the statistic I used is from the prison intake forms that a convict would fill out when first arriving there, before anyone 'got to them' yet.
Priests and ministers also get more involved in poor and "bad" communities. But whatever.
Your statistic was 85% of peeps are religious. 80-100% of peeps in jail are religious. Am I missing something here cuz these results don't show it either way?
I don't know what you don't understand about that. 85 % of Americans claim a religion, so that means 15% don't claim one. Now, if 80-100% (depending) of people in prison claim a religion, then religious people make up the vast majority of the prison population. The 15% of Americans that are NOT religious are NOT committing most of the crimes, the religious ones are.
The arguement here is, are religious people 'better citizens' or not. If religious people were better citizens, they wouldn't make up the vast majority of the prison population. The 15% of non-religious people could make up 100% of the prison population (and then some, there's something like 2 million inmates) if it were true that non-religious people were more apt to commit crimes. The fact that the statistics show that most inmates are religious is telling. If religious people were 'better citizens', the statistics would show that there would be a much higher proportion of non-religious people incarcerated.
Why? If 50% of the population likes orange juice, and 50% of prisoners like orange juice, then that's a completely predictable and meaningless statistic. Enlighten me, oh wise one, and don't comment if you have nothing to add.
I wasn't talking about facts. I was just stating that my impression, which could be wrong, was that religious people probably do more charity work than non-religious people, and charity work is the way I had chosen to measure good citizenship. I did mention that people who do charity work do not always do it for good reasons, but I don't think that really matters when measuring good citizenship.
Your way of measuring good citizenship, crime rates, is also a valid way to measure it, and yields different results to my beliefs. You may be right, I may be right.
Religious People Make Better Citizens - or not
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
Huh? Are you serious? Where did you get these 'facts' from and what religion are you talking about, there's more than one religion, ya know. There's also many, many more ways than charity work to be a good person. A lot of people who do charity work are just doing it because they've been ordered to by law (community service), tax evasion, and other self-serving reasons.
"The statistically verifiable reality should come as no surprise to those who have first hand experience with criminal and religious sociology:
1. The majority of Americans (85%) have a stated religious preference.
2. The majority of American prisoners (between 80 and 100%, depending on the study consulted) also have a stated religious preference"
--
taciturn
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
-
dom180
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
So 85% of Americans are religious and around 80% of American prisoners are religious? Isn't that kind of... obvious? Not to mention, you deride his lack of facts and then state that most people involved in charity are doing it for "self-serving reasons", without backing that up. Just saying.
Not that I agree with dom180 either, as I haven't found any evidence to back that up. I stand by my initial statement that religion has no direct correlation with good or bad citizenship. There are good and bad people in any group.
--
wigsplitz
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
wigsplitz
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
mizeka
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
And I didn't say 'most people', I said 'a lot of people'.
I can provide information to back this up, although as for court-ordered community service, it's going to be tough to provide exact specifics as the laws and sentences vary so widely from state to state. We can do an average though. Let's take DUI's, that's one of the more common arrests that net a sentence for community service.
"The total number of hours of community service that a person can be ordered to perform varies from state to state and also depends on the conditions of the arrest. Some states require a minimum sentence of at least 50 community service hours for a first-time conviction. In other states, the sentence for a first-time conviction can be as little as 24 hours or as much as 100 hours.
Repeat offenders receive harsher penalties. For third time offenders, it is possible to be ordered to serve anywhere from 150 to 600 hours. This, of course, is in addition to other fines, penalties, and jail time"
DUI arrests by state for 2008: http://www.numberof.net/number-of-dui-arrests-per-state/
So, use those figures to make a reasonable conclusion. Littering and graffiti are also commonly dealt with by a sentence to community service. Look at your state's laws, you can see the sentencing guidelines for any given crime.
I got 24 hours of community service for an APC, and when I've been to court I've personally seen numerous people get sentenced to hours. Go sit in on court and watch, it's open to the public. When you've 'been there' you can pretty much recognize who is just putting in their time, and who's there for charity. VERY obvious.
Go to Charity Watch to see how charities spend their money, many have bad ratings. Charity Watch breaks it down by how much of your money goes to salaries, solicitation, and actual aid to people in need.
Obvious? Yes and no. One could think that the 15% that don't claim a religion are the ones in prison, but that's not the way it is. It's the religious folks that are in prison. I pointed that out because it's one of the only solid statistical facts to support the theory that religious people aren't 'better ctizens'.
--
taciturn
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
UnrecognizableMan
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Exactly, but it was worded such that it seemed to try to imply a connection between "criminal and religious sociology", when really, it's an incredibly obvious statistic. I'm sure 80% of people who buy orange juice are religious too. There is no categorical connection between the two. That's my only point.
--
wigsplitz
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
It's not exactly obvious though. If religious people were better citizens, then they would make up a lower percent of prison population.
It's all about proportions.
Men make up roughly 50% of the population, but about 92% of the prison population. Are you saying you can't draw conclusions from that? I don't see how you can't connect the whole proportional thing. If religious people were 'better' then they'd have a disproportionately lower number of inmates as compared to the general population.
--
taciturn
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
You clearly didn't read what I wrote - I'm arguing against the idea that religion has any effect on being a better person. We're agreeing. Please go back and read my comment.
--
wigsplitz
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I got it, thanks...and we don't agree 100%. Sorry.
Don't a lot of priests and ministers go around prisons? And once you've been sentenced to jail you might be looking for some forgiveness! I don't think the number of religious peoples in prisons vs non-religious is a fair statistic to use.
--
wigsplitz
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
The statistics come from intake forms. So, yes, it is fair to use. Yes, some people convert or 'find' religion in prison, but the statistic I used is from the prison intake forms that a convict would fill out when first arriving there, before anyone 'got to them' yet.
--
UnrecognizableMan
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Priests and ministers also get more involved in poor and "bad" communities. But whatever.
Your statistic was 85% of peeps are religious. 80-100% of peeps in jail are religious. Am I missing something here cuz these results don't show it either way?
--
UnrecognizableMan
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
wigsplitz
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
Is it not cool to say peeps anymore?
I don't know what you don't understand about that. 85 % of Americans claim a religion, so that means 15% don't claim one. Now, if 80-100% (depending) of people in prison claim a religion, then religious people make up the vast majority of the prison population. The 15% of Americans that are NOT religious are NOT committing most of the crimes, the religious ones are.
The arguement here is, are religious people 'better citizens' or not. If religious people were better citizens, they wouldn't make up the vast majority of the prison population. The 15% of non-religious people could make up 100% of the prison population (and then some, there's something like 2 million inmates) if it were true that non-religious people were more apt to commit crimes. The fact that the statistics show that most inmates are religious is telling. If religious people were 'better citizens', the statistics would show that there would be a much higher proportion of non-religious people incarcerated.
You suck at math -.-
--
taciturn
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Why? If 50% of the population likes orange juice, and 50% of prisoners like orange juice, then that's a completely predictable and meaningless statistic. Enlighten me, oh wise one, and don't comment if you have nothing to add.
I wasn't talking about facts. I was just stating that my impression, which could be wrong, was that religious people probably do more charity work than non-religious people, and charity work is the way I had chosen to measure good citizenship. I did mention that people who do charity work do not always do it for good reasons, but I don't think that really matters when measuring good citizenship.
Your way of measuring good citizenship, crime rates, is also a valid way to measure it, and yields different results to my beliefs. You may be right, I may be right.