Ross Sauer -> Ed Hulett wrote:
 RS> "Ed Hulett -> Ross Sauer"  wrote in
 RS> news:10600$HOLYSMOKE{at}JamNNTPd:

 RS>>> Looks like those who don't have to rely on invisible imaginary
 EH>>   beings are RS> happier.


 RS>>> A new study (pdf) into the correlation between religious belief
 EH>>   and RS> contentment and security shows that the less religious a
 EH>>   society is the RS> happier and more secure it becomes.

 RS>>> The study, by Gregory Paul, published in Evolutionary Psychology
 EH>>   Journal RS> puts paid to the widely touted notion that without
 EH>>   religion society would RS> collapse. According to Mr Paul, the
 EH>>   reverse is true. Religion flourishes RS> where a society is
 EH>>   dysfunctional and poor. When affluence is present and RS> people
 EH>>   feel secure through the provision of health care and social RS>
 EH>>   services, religion quickly loses its hold. In other words, those
 EH>>   societies RS> that have moved furthest away from religion have
 EH>>   higher levels of RS> contentment, stability and affluence.

 RS>>> Unlike many others in his field, Paul does not think that
 EH>>   humanity is RS> hardwired for religion, nor that belief in a higher
 EH>>   being is necessary for RS> a society to achieve a high level of
 EH>>   functionality.

 RS>>> "Popular religion," Paul says, "is a coping
mechanism for the
 EH>>   anxieties of RS> a dysfunctional social and economic
environment."
 EH>>   Simply put, it
 EH>> means that
 RS>>> without safety nets such as universal healthcare (which more
 EH>>   prosperous RS> democracies have), people depend on the
"supernatural
 EH>>   entities that could RS> be petitioned for aid and protection."

 RS>>> http://www.secularism.org.uk/116203.html

 EH>> That is pure, unadulterated, psychobabble and has no connection to
 EH>> reality.

 RS> And just how do you know this?

Because it is published on a secularism website and because Mr. Paul starts
with a conclusion and then uses his "study" to support it.

It tries to make the claim that universal healthcare somehow makes religion
unnecessary.

 RS> Your church inform you of it, the same way Scientology teaches that
 RS> psychiatry is false?

No, your post was the first time I even heard of such a "study."
My Church doesn't work that way. Your question makes it clear you haven't a
clue.

 RS> The fact is, this study is goring your particular sacred cow, Ed, namely
 RS> your own belief that those without religion are unhappy.

No, this "study" is just plane nonsense. There is no correlation
between universal healthcare and religion. Nor does his claim that religion
is prevalent in a poor, dysfunctional society make any sense.

The US is one of the most affluent and least dysfunctional countries and
the majority of society is devout about their religion. Only a small
percentage of US citizens are non-religious. That leaves universal
healthcare which isn't the sign of affluent democracy, but of socialism.

Even the poor in the US are more affluent than most societies with
universal healthcare.

Let me know when you find a real study and not some psychobabble that
begins with a conclusion and tries to support it with ridiculous
"evidence."

Ed

-- 
"The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is
to fill the world with fools." --Herbert Spencer

Blogs: http://edsramblings.wordpress.com  | Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/ed.hulett
http://woodcarvingnsuch.wordpress.com     | Twitter: yaesu
http://edsscrollsawbits.blogspot.com

Linux User# 416016
Linux Machine# 379711

--- Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817)