NCAAbbs

There were a couple of articles in the Dallas paper (http://www.dallasnews.com) remarking on a new study from Baylor University about the different ways people see God. The four main divisions were:

Authoritatian: God is highly involved in daily lives and quite angry. 31.4%
Benevolent: God is very actuive but is mainly a force of positive influence. 23%
Critical:: God isn't active in the world but observes and views the current state unfavorably. 16%
Distant (God isn't active and doesn't hold opinions about our lives) 24.4%
Atheists 5.2%

People of different races and in different parts of the country tend to hold different views.

the study can be found online at http://www.baylor.edu

I think the real question should be, what causes you to think the way you do about God? Why do you think God is ____? What do you base it on?

I find it interesting that Deism is the second most popular.

Quote:Distant (God isn't active and doesn't hold opinions about our lives) 24.4%

I find it kind of scary that most people think God is launching lightning bolts down on us.

From what I count that is 5 divisions, not 4...

Link

Check out table 1 on page 11.

Interesting Data. According to that. People form ages 18-30 are 39.0% Evengelical Protestant or 18.6% Unaffiliated. Both of thos are the largest of all age groups.

Education also has some interesting numbers.

Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:I find it interesting that Deism is the second most popular.

Quote:Distant (God isn't active and doesn't hold opinions about our lives) 24.4%

I find it kind of scary that most people think God is launching lightning bolts down on us.

From what I count that is 5 divisions, not 4...

I threw in the atheism, as I knew if I didn't someone would notice the numbers didn't come to 100%. It was not mentioned except in the pie chart.

GrayBeard Wrote:I think the real question should be, what causes you to think the way you do about God? Why do you think God is ____? What do you base it on?

First which way do you think and why? never mind, i know why, just not which way.

OptimisticOwl Wrote:First which way do you think and why? never mind, i know why, just not which way.

Let's not start this again

Should we just add a God forum to NCABBS??

Might not be a bad idea... The spin room has kind of slid that way.

No. The only ones there would be our three resident Bible-thumpers, whose answers to every question is read the Bible - even when they are disagreeing with each other. Anyone else venturing there with any questions or opinions would soon be shouted down with Biblical references.

Religious questions are a legitimate part of the political discourse because religious positions and positions based on moral codes are a part of both national and international politics.

I was more intrigued with the parts about how different races have different viewpoints. This was presented as perhaps being a partial reason why 11:00 AM Sunday morning is often callled the most segregated hour in America. It might also explain why black churches tend to support a platform that most Christians find abhorrent - a pro-choice, pro-gay, wink-an-a-nod toward sexually liberal mores and lifestyles, a group who find nothing wrong with either Clinton's sexual activities or his perjury based on same.

It also might explain why Northeasterners tend to be Episcopalian and Democratic, Southerners Baptist and Republican.

I would prefer to see the larger issues discussed rather than each individual's view and their reasons for it. If anyone wants my view, PM me. or just read the earlier men of faith thread - I think I expressed them there.

OptimisticOwl Wrote:It might also explain why black churches tend to support a platform that most Christians find abhorrent - a pro-choice, pro-gay, wink-an-a-nod toward sexually liberal mores and lifestyles, a group who find nothing wrong with either Clinton's sexual activities or his perjury based on same.

I am now Catholic but I was raised in a black church so I will put input on this statement based on my experience.

I do not know or have been to a black church that supports any of the things that you mention above. I think you may be confusing our "political leaders" with the common everyday black Christian.

Pro-Choice - With the rate of black unwed pregnancy, it should be apparent that black are not taught a Pro-Choice(Pro Abortion) message in our churches. Unlike many good white folds most blacks are unable to ship their pregnant daughters away to have the kid and come back or get away with a hush hush abortion.

Pro-Gay - Black churches teach against homosexuality just like any other church but if there are homosecuals in the church they are not ostracized.

Our thoughts about Clinton have to do with the fact that most of us feel that type of activity has happened all along. Why make a big deal about it with Clinton. As for perjury on the subject, most every man out there has had an encounter where they have lied about what heppened

uhmump95 Wrote:

OptimisticOwl Wrote:It might also explain why black churches tend to support a platform that most Christians find abhorrent - a pro-choice, pro-gay, wink-an-a-nod toward sexually liberal mores and lifestyles, a group who find nothing wrong with either Clinton's sexual activities or his perjury based on same.

I am now Catholic but I was raised in a black church so I will put input on this statement based on my experience.

I do not know or have been to a black church that supports any of the things that you mention above. I think you may be confusing our "political leaders" with the common everyday black Christian.

Pro-Choice - With the rate of black unwed pregnancy, it should be apparent that black are not taught a Pro-Choice(Pro Abortion) message in our churches. Unlike many good white folds most blacks are unable to ship their pregnant daughters away to have the kid and come back or get away with a hush hush abortion.

Pro-Gay - Black churches teach against homosexuality just like any other church but if there are homosecuals in the church they are not ostracized.

Our thoughts about Clinton have to do with the fact that most of us feel that type of activity has happened all along. Why make a big deal about it with Clinton. As for perjury on the subject, most every man out there has had an encounter where they have lied about what heppened

My point was that that while most black christians do not support abortion or gay rights they vote for the party that does. So they support those positions at the polls. but not in their lives, and that has always seemed strange to me. I know other christians, white, who also are anti-abortion and think homosexuality is a sin, but always vote a straight democratic ticket. That also has seemed odd to me.

Don't know of anyone shipping away their daughters for hush hush abortions any more. Maybe politicians or other public figures. That sounds more like the Sixties. It seems now that everyone either gets the abortion or has the child, but no one hides their choice.

As for clinton, I understand him wanting a blow job.
I understand him lying about it to keep it from his wife.
BUT when it gets to court, under oath, it is time to fess up. If you don't it is perjury. And if you continue trying to cover up your perjury, it is obstruction of justice. The situation changed when he left the house and went to court. Lie to your wife all you want, but don't lie under oath.
Still amazes me that so many democrats and other people dpn't get the distinction between ordinary lying and lying under oath in a court of law.

OptimisticOwl Wrote:My point was that that while most black christians do not support abortion or gay rights they vote for the party that does. So they support those positions at the polls. but not in their lives, and that has always seemed strange to me.

I have said it before and will say it again. Blacks vote for Democrats, because once upon a time, the put a Civil Rights plank in their platform. The Republicans did not. Therefore blacks see the Republicans as racist as do the many "conservative" southern whites that automatically started voting Republican nationally after this happened.

uhmump95 Wrote:

OptimisticOwl Wrote:My point was that that while most black christians do not support abortion or gay rights they vote for the party that does. So they support those positions at the polls. but not in their lives, and that has always seemed strange to me.

I have said it before and will say it again. Blacks vote for Democrats, because once upon a time, the put a Civil Rights plank in their platform. The Republicans did not. Therefore blacks see the Republicans as racist as do the many "conservative" southern whites that automatically started voting Republican nationally after this happened.

Was it not a majority of Republicans that voted for the civil rights act?

GrayBeard Wrote:

uhmump95 Wrote:

OptimisticOwl Wrote:My point was that that while most black christians do not support abortion or gay rights they vote for the party that does. So they support those positions at the polls. but not in their lives, and that has always seemed strange to me.

I have said it before and will say it again. Blacks vote for Democrats, because once upon a time, the put a Civil Rights plank in their platform. The Republicans did not. Therefore blacks see the Republicans as racist as do the many "conservative" southern whites that automatically started voting Republican nationally after this happened.

Was it not a majority of Republicans that voted for the civil rights act?

I do not know. I just know the black reasoning behind voting Republican.

I understand your reasoning, Mump, and agree with it. But why now, in 2006, do the black churches get behind pro-abortion, pro-gay, candidates and planks. Do they feel they still owe a further debt to the Democratic party? Why do they not vote their beliefs?

OptimisticOwl Wrote:I understand your reasoning, Mump, and agree with it. But why now, in 2006, do the black churches get behind pro-abortion, pro-gay, candidates and planks. Do they feel they still owe a further debt to the Democratic party? Why do they not vote their beliefs?

Maybe they figure that overall those people are the best candidates to do the job. Just because they are pro-gay rights or pro-choice, does not mean that anyone is being forced to be gay or to have an abortion.

I'm tired of the religious groups in this country trying to save me. If I want my wife to have an abortion, my wife and I are the ones who would have to deal with the repercusions when we meet the maker, not the religious groups. If I were to decide I was gay this does not cause anybody to go to hell except my partner and I. It is that simple!

I will never understand the line of thinking that anybody who is pro-choice or pro-gay rights is unelectable, but someone who has a past history of lying, bankruptcy, and any other number of brushes with the law is. That is how many religious groups feel, and that bothers me to the extreme...

As for "pro-life" people who vote for "pro-choice" candidates: Just because the leaders may be "pro-choice" and it is legal to have an abortion, does not mean that you have to have one.

Some religious (and non-religious) may feel that they need to force their ethical views onto other people, but apparently some feel that it is not neccessary.

I am a (ususally) Republican voter who is de facto pro-choice and pro gay marriage. (both for reasons other than what the Democrats put forward). I don't let these issues change my vote, as they are minor issues to me and I tend to cast my vote on what i consider major issues. I can see individual black voters - in fact, any voter - doing the same. BUT if I were a church leader who preached against abortion and/or homosexuality, I would have to think long and hard about requesting my parishioners to cast their votes for the party that opposes my church on those beliefs. I can see civil rights issues overriding those issues in 1966. I cannot see it in 2006. Times, and political parties, have changed.