(March 19, 2012 at 9:35 am)StatCrux Wrote: I don't see how statistics make the argument? Are you saying that its perfectly acceptable to imply a group of people are paedophiles depending on how many you find? What is that figure? 5% 10%? What percentage of criminals within a group gives you justification to call or imply they are all paedophiles? I personally take the view that implying any group of people are guilty as a whole because of the actions of some of thier members (regardless of numbers) is at best juvenile and illogical. But some people prefer juvenile and illogical as opposed to discussion in my experience..
Hahahaha, yes. Juvenile and illogical. I just gave you the numerical figures [and you can verify them pretty easily using any basic search engine, or, hell, wikipedia if you wanna find the sources for the US department of corrections] that show that christians overwhelmingly outnumber atheists in prisons for violent and sexual crimes both in sheer numbers AND in gross averages, supplementing the point as well that you simply can't accuse all atheists of being similar because of one or two murderers because the only thing that truly 'unites' us is that we don't believe in god[s]. Whereas christians are all united by a rigid belief system that demands they act a certain way, adhere to a strict code of what god demands, and follow the pentateuch and bible as prophesy and instructive moral literature.
Really, if you can't grasp the points I'm making, hey, that's your problem, I laid it out pretty bare for ya, but don't call me illogical and juvenile in some snide little offhanded way just because of your own limitations, cuz you're fitting the general stereotype of the condescending holier-than-thou christian when you do.
In other words you are proving my point that you can judge most christians by the actions of their peers quickly and easily and with a fair degree of accuracy. Might wanna stop doing that.
