Should have said least religious here. Not most secular.
Sure with the China example it is easy to see that it is reasonable that many things explain some of the less ideal outcomes there.
This is overblown. How many buildings have burned out of the several hundred million buildings? Is this approaching 0.0001%. I would sure be concerned of a widespread issue if we were getting close to those numbers. How many have been killed out of the 330,000,000? This is not as widespread as media is saying. I am not saying these things are okay, just that we are overly concerned with them.
I can concede this. However, so are reservations here in the US (sovereign nations). We don’t really count those. I’ll say that a country should have more than a 1000 people to count. I don’t think that is unreasonable.
Are we talking super homogenous societies with extensive social insurance that have for some time now been incapable of achieving a fertile rate capable of even replacing themselves in order to pay for that insurance into perpetuity?
I am talking about the 20 most and least religious countries.
I’ll even concede to @chris_ottawa that we can count the Vatican, it we also can include Jonestown, the sovereign nation reservations in the US, and Richard Branson’s Island. It is clear to me why we wouldn’t use these super small countries as examples. It is basically anecdotal evidence with any of these examples. Additionally, I don’t think any of these have statistics on them in regards to what I have been talking about.
The countries in the top 20 listed are outside of being anecdotal evidence.
I can dig it up if you like. To be clear, I am not saying religion causes these worse outcomes, just that the most religious countries have worse outcomes, and the least religious countries have far better outcomes ON AVERAGE (which is why it is unreasonable to weight Chinas results by population, but I can’t seem to communicate this so others understand) when it comes to things like happiness, wealth, life expectancy, crime, education… I personally believe it is causation, but correlation.
Being less religious does not mean they don’t believe in God. Also, someone might not believe all of the mumbo jumbo in the Bible yet be influenced on a cultural level by religion.
Well, the 9/11 terrorists only took out 3 buildings and we went to war with 2 countries over it. I also remember the day being mostly peaceful. Outside of the attacks not much happened. So I guess prospective matters.
I happen to be against violence, looting and rioting, even if the vast majority of the place is ok. People are still getting hurt and killed over something really stupid.
If it were just one day and then peace, I wouldn’t be so upset. But 3 months of riots, mayhem, death and disorder is a bit much. And every time a rapist or a murderer gets himself shot now, people go about tearing up other people’s shit and hurting them…
However, the NBA boycott was hilarious. I thought it was an Onion article.
“Hey guys I have an idea, since our viewership is already down 40%, lets piss more fans off and boycott because the cops shot a rapist, child abuser. That will get their attention!” LOL!
I still think measuring happiness is a weird metric. You can have any belief system or ideology and have good or bad circumstances that make you happy or miserable.
Is a religious homeless person happier than an atheist millionaire? I would hazard to guess no, but what do I know?
Anthony Bourdain was perhaps the luckiest, most privileged guy on earth and he killed himself because he was miserable.
Many people are bad at understanding risk. Many thought that they had a reasonable chance of getting killed by terrorists after 9/11. However, based on the stats, it was completely unfounded to be in fear. We shouldn’t fear terrorists, or rioters as our chances of getting killed by them is so much smaller than the chances of getting killed by a poor diet. It is actually reasonable to be afraid of being too fat, or not exercising enough. There is also a lot more you can do to prevent being fat.
Has it impacted you to a large degree outside of social and regular media? I am guessing not. I live near Minneapolis, and the impact it has had on me is close to 0.
Yeah, I had to watch an 8 year old girl get shot in Atlanta because her mom drove past some imaginary boundary set up around a burnt down Wendy’s. It did greatly upset me.
Fortunately, I live in a red state and we tend to squash this shit with a quickness when it happens.
9/11 happened no where near me either. It probably had less impact on me than the riots. And because of my type of work, NYC descending in to a hellscape does affect my employment because many of the firms are based there.
And watching night after night after night of violence and chaos disturbs the crap out of me. 32 people are dead, so far. How many more have to die before it matters?
After all, this is the result of the death of one person, who’s death however tragic, didn’t impact me at all.
I guess I’m wondering if your happier nations were happy for some time, perhaps even before their religiosity fell below their disbelief. As in, did they build up whatever happiness capital prior, and have now increased their disbelief while living off the credit, if you will.
All of them matter. What I am saying is it is a mistake to think 32 people dying is a huge risk to you, or the country as a whole. A bunch of buildings burning isn’t a big risk either when we consider the percentage that survived is likely north of 99.999%.
We should dedicate resources to fixing these issues. Honestly, the riots in MN and WI will be short lived. It is going to be cold AF in a couple months, and I would bet that we won’t see a lot of the riots in sub 0 temperature.
