There is already a new movie poster that documents his study. It's at digitalfog news. "Religion with Roots in Hell."

I read this one with absolute disbelief that any reporter would find value in the research. Did the ACLU sponsor Gledhill?

There is no assessment of liberal/progressive impacts, such as: social welfare, anti-death penalty, abortion on demand, homosexual marriage, tolerance campaigns (homosexual sensitivity training in public schools), political correctness, absolution from personal responsibility, overly liberal judicial system, personal privacy, diminished consequences for socially unacceptible actions, and on and on. There no consideration given to the impact of: sexually explicit prime-time TV, increased graphic violence in movies, graphically violent video games, female-degrading and anti-authority (anti-law) rap music, open promotion of sexual activity in schools (condom use training), anti-abstinence campaigns, anti-Christian campaigns (by the ALCU), anti-Boy Scouts campaigns (again the ACLU), the impact of a sexually immoral president, and on and on.

This “research” report is morally and ethically bankrupt when all of the crime and teen sexual activity rates are hung solely on the increase in belief in God. I’d like to see comparisons between today’s statistics and those of this country 50 years ago and again 100 years ago. Let’s take a real close look at the impact of our elitist liberal/progressive social programs and the associated outcomes. That’s probably the farthest thing from the researcher’s and Gledhill’s minds!

The news story misrepresents the study and the study itself is seriously wonky. Details:

http://magicstatistics.blogspot.com/2005/09/from-our-bulging-how-not-to-do.html

(Pardon the shameless self-promotion.)

What a straw man argument - as if referring to a bunch of dictators proves anything about religion. Why don't you conservatives ever make a real argument, instead of cracking juvenile insults a la Ann Coulter? By the way, I'm sure Ayatollah Falwell would really make this a better place - NOT!

So "Ayatollah Falwell" would NOT be a juvenile insult?

Hoist by your own petard, joe.

Joe: The real question is, are you making the world a better place? Remind me again, exactly how many people Mr. Falwell has murdered, I forget. I mean, as long as you have decided to keep track of all the lives lost and innocents murdered, you should at the very least try to keep an accurate account of who shot John in the ass; where the bullit went in and where it came out.
I have listened to this pap my entire adult life and the level of stupidity required to accept that religion, any religion, is responsible for all the evil done by humans, to humans defies my ability to comprehend. The level of paranoia is just to great, even for me.
Please try to keep in mind that most of the war related deaths in the last century were directly linked to an attempt to institutionalize secular humanism, vis, communism,(or various forms of socialism), not traditional religions as we know them.

My "by the way" made it clear I was indulging in your own tactics deliberately to make a point.

Went right over your head, huh Benning? Bet it's not the first time that's happened.

Whether you killed anyone had nothing to do with the argument, which was whether you can be a good person without religion. My reference to Ayatollah Falwell (if the fatwa fits, Jerry) demonstrated that just because you wrap yourself in religion doesn't mean you're not a bad person. And considering all the hatemongering he's done and encouraged, he's responsibile in some way for violence. The kinds of people a person attracts says a lot about them; true whether you mean Cindy Sheehan or Jerry Falwell.

And if you look at all of history, most wars were based on religious grounds. But religion or communism or whatever is just an excuse for someone's agenda anyway. I don't condemn all religious people because of Osama bin laden, and you shouldn't condemn all secular humanists because of Joe Stalin.

Peter Glover does a wonderful job of shredding what he refers to an "an unadultered piece of anti-Christian, anti-American bilge" [Can the British turn a phrase, or what?]. You can find it here:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/petercglover/119806.html?mode=reply

Of course religion causes higher teen pregnancy rates: all those Catholic priests running around.

D'oh!

That is the EXACT lie to which I referenced. Add them up. Stalin alone, is responsible for 35 MILLION,(more or less), OF HIS OWN CITIZENS!
Contrary to your ascertian, most wars were not fought about religion; religion being an aside.

You let religion off the hook by saying it's "an aside", but don't show the same charity towards any other motive. Sometimes it is an aside; sometimes not. But Joe Stalin would have been a dictator no matter what philosophy he settled on. Blaming secular humanists for some thug is ridiculous.

There it is: a new justification for those anti-religion chaps to get their way once more.

"Imagine... no religion..."

Nice utopia singing going around in those circles. Next thing we know, we're going to see something like this one T-shirt found somewhere in California:

"So Many Christians, So Few Lions..."