> >>Irrespective of the "objective" truth of the Bible, the > superiority of a > >>"Bible believing society" is a position I strongly believe, > >> > > Doesn't your position commit you to believing that the people in our > society who do not believe in the Bible > are in fact mostly selfish mean criminals? What empirical support is > there for this claim? > > Most folks criminals/immoral? Not at all, only generally more immorally acting people as belief goes down.
Further, I derive support for this from limited thought experiments: Society A: more Atheist, Society B: more Bible Believing. In which society do I expect more fraud? more cheating spouses & promiscuity? more theft? more murder? Well, even without empirical support, I believe B will be better for me to live in, whether I, personally, am a weak Episcopalian/ agnostic/ atheist/ or devout believer. I'd be very interested in your answers to the following: 1) Which of the two Societies, more Atheist or more Believing, do you believe would be better? 2) Do you have empirical support for your belief? 3) Does empirical support matter in "this case"? Recall this is my initial attempt to answer Alex's question about what changes peoples' minds. But my 2 & 3 challenges above also touch on the Occam's razor issue earlier and the burden of proof with respect to the existence of God. I do not think the atheist has to prove there is no God -- his job is much harder. He has to prove, empirically, that an more atheist society is better than one with more believers. Until he can do so, it seems quite rational for believers who want a better overall society to remain believers--don't you think? Not to leave it unsaid, the recent Nazi & Commie attempts at atheistic societies in practice (empirical evidence?) make me think any anti-believer has a lot of problems. Tom Grey, an American Libertarian/neo-conservative, happily living in ex-Commie Slovakia (you're welcome to write me directly too) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
