AJ,

I do not "need" to do anything, any more than you felt a "need" to answer my recent question to you when when we were discussing creation versus evolution. I believe my claims regarding the superiority of Christian based Western society are self-evident; you do not. So be it.

ttbn,

You do “need” to do those things I mentioned if you want your arguments to be taken seriously. Because, as it stands, they can be dismissed as fallacious as freely as they were asserted.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.

<<I believe my claims regarding the superiority of Christian based Western society are self-evident; you do not. So be it.>>

So now it’s just self-evident to you? Sounds very faith-based. The way you were speaking before made it sound like it was an objective fact.

But thanks anyway. Your response does not come as a surprise and is more satisfying than I think you realise. I hope you at least now understand the problems with committing the Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy and mistaking correlation with causation. Especially when such relationships can be found on closer inspection not to exist.

AJ Philips, I don't know from what perspective you view our world from, but if you can not see western democracy as being superior societies for the majority of people to Muslim, Asian, or communist societies, I suggest you find a new position to view the world. The one you are using is totally wrong.

Could it be an ivory tower?

Hasbeen,

I do see Western democracy as superior in a lot of respects, but that doesn’t mean that Christianity is the cause or foundation of that, and the stats I provided you with discredit such a connection. Not to mention the fun facts I provided ttbn with.

Did you know that homicide rates go up and down with ice cream sales? The correlation is strong and has been around since ice cream was invented. Of course, eating ice creams doesn’t cause people to commit homicide. There is a third factor driving the two - seasons.

It’s a pity you didn’t understand the Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy or that correlation doesn’t necessitate causation in that debate. You could have wiped the floor with your opponents.

<<Could [your perspective] be an ivory tower?>>

Ah, an ad hominem (http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem). What difference would it make even if it were? I’m not the one here who has been short on facts and full of assumptions. Without evidence for your position, my points remain regardless of my perspective. Pointing out that someone is an academic (which I'm not) is not a trump card. You need to explain why they're wrong.

Anyway, I still don’t see what checking yourself off as a Christian on the census will prove, other than perhaps a touch of self-loathing on your behalf.