60% of Americans Believe Bible Stories Such As Noah's Ark Are "Literally True"

[NNN0LHI]

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/primetime/US/views_of_bible_poll_040216.html

Bible Stories Are "Literally True"

Red Sea Creation Noah

All 64% 61% 60%
Catholics 50 51 44
Protestants 79 75 73
Evangelical Protestants 91 87 87
Non-Evangelical Protestants 59 55 50
No Religion 32 24 29

Nearly every group that's more apt to believe in a literal interpretation — Protestants, southerners, blacks, lower-income and less-educated Americans — are also more likely to be evangelicals.

Three in four Protestants or more take these biblical stories as literally true, compared with half of Catholics or slightly fewer. One reason for the difference is that Protestants are nearly three times more likely than Catholics to consider themselves born-again or evangelical Christians, 58 percent to 21 percent.

But even among Catholics, church attendance helps shape views of the Bible. Those who attend Mass at least once a week are 15 to 21 points more likely to believe in the literal truth of these stories.

About eight in 10 adult Americans are Christians; a quarter are evangelical Protestants, about one in five are non-evangelical Protestants, just over one in five, Catholics; and about one in 10, other Christians. About one in 10 profess no religion.

Methodology

This ABCNEWS/Primetime poll was conducted by telephone Feb. 6-10, 2004, among a random national sample of 1,011 adults. The results have a three-point error margin. Field work was done by ICR-International Communications Research of Media, Pa.

http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2008/05/15/how-did-noahs-ark-float/

How did Noah’s Ark float?

The story of Noah’s Ark in The Bible is widely read as an allegory and discoveries of a stunning range of species of wildlife raise questions, for those who believe in the account as literal truth, about how they all crammed aboard.

The total number of species of animals and plants on the planet, according to biologists, may well range up to the tens of millions. About 1.8 million have been identified so far – many of them are plants and fish that Noah did not take along to escape the flood, according to the Book of Genesis.

Even the Ark, with its three decks, would have quickly filled if Noah took at least two of all living creatures as God instructed Noah in the Book of Genesis.

Modern maritime standards are that cows, for instance, need about 2 square metres each on ocean voyages in pens of about half a dozen. The Ark was about 140 metres (460 feet) long — the world’s biggest container ships are now almost 400 metres long.

One 2004 poll showed that 60 percent of Americans read the story of Noah’s Ark as literally true.

[mcctatas]

1. That is frankly terrifying...

but somehow believable :crazy:

[amdezurik]

2. the funniest part?

that at least 60% of that 60% when the first saw Indian Jones thought the "Ark" they found was to small...the abyssmal ignorance of the 'religious' types is amazing.

[rebel with a cause]

35. That 60% don't know their Bible.

The Ark of the Covenant is of course different than Noah's ark. If you are going to believe, then know what you believe and how to believe in it. ;)

[amdezurik]

45. ah, but that is the roblem

if you DO read it, you come to realize it is about the filthiest rauchiest book around. Incest,rape (incestous as well) ,murder to rape, killing kids, killing moms, hell killing everyone. So of course you only read the parts you want to (not you specifically, but in general) and the rest is ignored.

[rebel with a cause]

55. I read it from cover to cover when I was around 25.

Have not really read it since except to reference something. I have sited some of the things I found in the Bible to those who believe it to be all roses and sunshine and they will call me a liar. Then when they find out that I am correct, they just shake their heads and try to explain it away.

One of my favorite stories, and I don't remember where it is now, is where this man goes to an inn. There are a group of men in the town who follow him there and demand the inn keeper give the man to them for sex because evidently the man is one good looking dude. The Inn keeper refuses but then when the men threaten them, he instead gives them his daughter and the man's maid servant. The evil men take the women and rape them all through the night, throwing them back on the Inn's porch (?) the next morning. The man and the Inn keeper weep for the women, kill them, cut them up into little pieces and throw these pieces across the desert/wilderness. Now the man was one of God's guys but I don't remember who he was and don't care enough to look it up. Just a little story I like to tell to show where women stood in the Old Testament of the Bible.
:evilgrin:

[amdezurik]

58. one of my faves was the story

about this fithy old man that some kids were teasing...so gawd sent a bunch of bears down to kill them all to protect this 'holy' guy from those mean widdle kids...

Well my all time favorite was how Lot's daughters 'took advantage' of him after his wife was 'turned to salt' because after all he was the holy Joe so he could do no wrong.

[rebel with a cause]

62. I don't remember the old man and the bears, to be honest.

But it was like Freud wrote the Lot and his seductive daughters episode. Talk about crossing your references(on my part). :rofl:

[amdezurik]

65. heh it was only 42 kids

Find Comfort in Scripture

The Lord sending bears to maul young children to death is nothing new to True Christians who have memorized their Bible! Saved folks know that the Lord Jesus is liable to send ravenous bears to kill children at the drop of a hat, as was the case when He sent two bears to rip apart 42 children who were rude enough to mock a bald man. Glory!



From The Holy Bible, 2 Kings 2:23-24:



"And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them"


"I am grateful that the Lord Jesus stopped this time at just one. Thank-you, Jesus!" - Pastor Deacon Fred

[rebel with a cause]

68. I guess I phrased it badly. I did not doubt the story existed.

I just couldn't remember it. I guess I should expect to not remember everything. Now that I see it, it comes back to me a bit, but heavens, it has been around forty years since I read it. ;)

I was actually only 22 when I read it through, right after my mother died. I found no comfort in the scriptures except in some of the teachings of Jesus. I found hope in them, that we could all accept others and live together without hate and judgments. Of course, as you said, I picked and chose what I wanted to believe.

[amdezurik]

69. I was not scolding you now!

just added some detail to my recollections. :)

[rebel with a cause]

70. Thanks for sharing you recollections.

It would have drove me crazy trying to remember where the bears came in. :7

I always worry that I come across wrong since I think faster than I type and sometimes things don't make it to the screen quite right. :eyes:

[vanderBeth]

3. I weep for humanity.

I refuse to believe this.

[YOY]

12. Me too.

Some may believe parts of the Great Flood legend...some may believe that the man existed and that he took his flocks into a great boat. Is that "literal" enough for the percentage?

Only a great fool would believe that he took 2 of all living creature and that we are all descended from him and his kids...although it would explain a good number of inbred idiots among us...

[Occulus]

47. There probably WAS a "Great Flood",

as it's found in many, many disparate religious (and, IIRC, even secular) traditions dating back thousands of years.

I'm equally certain there was no "god" involved. Perhaps a comet hit an ocean back then, or a huge lake in a glacier broke open, or something of the sort, but there's little doubt, from everything I've learned, that the flood itself was an actual event. That just doesn't mean at all that any religion was directly involved.

Hell, it could have been the result of a massive earthquake along some rift valley that caused a major, oceans-spanning tsunami.

[YOY]

48. That's exactly what I mean KGF.

I too believe there was a "great flood". Geologic evidence shows it. Some guy may very well have build a great ship to save his farm, family, and the animals around them. Are we all descended from them? Nope. Did they exist? Maybe.

Does that make me and you a believer in literal biblical interpretation to chock up for that poll? I'd like to think not but some could see it as that way.

[LeftyMom]

71. There would be geological evidence of such a thing.

While pretty much every place was at some point subject to severe flooding, and people who couldn't travel much or interact with other cultures might have regarded regional flooding as world-wide, that's hardly evidence of a worldwide flood.

In any case, the idea of a worldwide flood (complete lack of evidence and existence of contrary evidence aside) would not make any sense. There's no mechanism for such a thing.

Making unevidenced assertions in order to justify a literal interpretation of ancient folktales is just plain silly.

[MadinMo]

24. I live in the midst of these kind of people.

And my in-laws are from the same cloth. It is pretty horrifying.

[KathieG]

31. Ditto...I'm in the same boat (no pun intended)

[baby_mouse]

76. Oh, we're fine, mostly. I think it's more your country that you should weep for. NT

[cdb]

4. 60% of Americans are delusional cretins. n/t

[Naturyl]

5. Scary. (n/t)

[Captiosus]

6. It's NOT?!?

But... but... Steve Carell was so convincing in Evan Almighty!

:rofl:

[kaybea]

32. Only 1.5% think Not Sure won the debate? But he's smarter than any man alive!

[The Straight Story]

7. It could be true

but truth is wrapped in locality, he may well have made a boat and took two of each creature in 'his world' which was a small area. Flood myths abound around that time, which may lead to believe they were not myths at all.

It is the interpretation of things by folks later which makes something larger than it was intended.

Two of every living creature can mean a lot of different things - sadly though people these days take the 'world' of back then to be the same one as we see it, which often leads to folks on the wrong path when it comes to the bible.

[Dogtown]

18. So, you're one of *them*

The 60%ers, that is.

Does the reference that you quote state that Noah was ordered to take two of each "local animal"?

And, if so, how did the remainder survive?


These are fairy-tales, fit for children. Your obfuscation would not fool adults; it only satisfies those with a desperate emotional need to believe.



I don't believe the 60% figure quoted, but admit I'm no expert on the glamour of religious indoctrination.

[The Straight Story]

23. I don't believe it in that way

It could have been a local flood, etc. To him that was the world.

Note, I say *IT COULD* have been true, and there is evidence to support a flood of 'biblical' proportions in some areas of the world (Noah was but one such story of a flood).

The difference between me and fundies is I don't read the bible as though it were written yesterday, but in a whole other time and place where customs were taken into account, lifestyles prevalent, etc and so on. It's called context, and too few understand it.

[Dogtown]

30. Ah! Folklore becoming literature,

*That* I have no problem with. It's the literal interpretations and the demands that I cater to others' beliefs that I find destructive.

If you choose to believe in elements of the Bible and the Judeo/Christian tradition I feel that is *none* of my business, and I wasn't dissing that.

I'm sure that local concerns did indeed make their way into the Bible, absolutely. We can agree to interpret those things individually, since you seem to be a reasonable person; not insisting that we all accept the validity of your beliefs.



:hi:

[The Straight Story]

73. I certainly don't want others to jump on to my beliefs with both feet :)

I think that what we believe, ala faith, should be separate from what we believe as a society, which is why I am pro choice and pro freedom on everything from smoking to religion to abortion.

[LanternWaste]

38. Seems to me that the statement...

Seems to me that the statement "Two of every living creature can mean a lot of different things" is an obvious disqualifier from being a Literalist in that it allows both room and opportunity for translation, textual criticism, etc. :shrug:

[Dogtown]

41. Yes, I admit baiting a bit.

I assumed I'd get the response I did, and I have no substantial problem with a non-literal acceptance of biblical lore.

[spoony]

43. The whole area of flood stories is intriguing

But I guess it's easier to call people dumb and crazy, hence this thread.

[Realityhack]

72. That is stretching things pretty far. n/t

[Name removed]

8. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[YOY]

9. I'd venture that stat to be much smaller in reality.

I don't buy that all encompasing fact...I'm sure a good number of people find parts to be true or that there may be some fact in there. About the same percentage of idiots that buy creationism wholesale are the real 100% literal truthers.

I wonder if they think Lot really existed and suffered literally...thereby proving that God is a dick.

[qb]

10. Well... I know first-hand that once you start disbelieving parts of the bible...

it's a slippery slope
:evilgrin:

[ProfessorGAC]

11. Not Sure I Believe It

I'm not sure these people know what "literally" mean. I read it, but there are some holes in the survey because the question includes the word "lilterally". Since people use that word wrongly all the time, i seriously wonder if they knew what the question really means.
The Professor

[The Straight Story]

14. My sister is a fundie, as are her friends

She even teaches creationism classes at church, went to a museum devoted to it, and so on.

I am a heathen I suppose to her because I see the word 'literal' as being something different then she does - the bible was written in a different time and she never takes into consideration such things (which is odd, because she loves ham/pork/etc and at one point used to wear a veil over her hair in church but later decided that belief did not apply to her...).

[ProfessorGAC]

20. Sor t Of Where I Was Going

You said it more clearly.
The Professor

[ContinentalOp]

56. Ha! I was going to post that same thing.

60% of the public says things like "He literally had steam coming out of his ears."

[Poll_Blind]

13. Demanding wizards who live in invisible castles of gold in the sky.

I could just never...buy into that. They say fiction has to be plausible.

PB

[BuyingThyme]

15. Well, if it's truly literature, doesn't that make it literally true?

[TBF]

22. Fiction is not necessarily literature... but literature can be fiction.

The devil is in the details :)

[marmar]

16. Oh come on. Are you telling me there really wasn't a wooden boat big enough....

.... to carry two types of every animal on earth (including holding tanks for Shamu, who was probably around back then) to safety?

Next, you're going to say something bad about the tooth fairy.

[kid a]

17. my reply to my mother (we do this to each other) when she says, "i prayed for you today"

"so, you and your imaginary friends are talking about me behind my back again?, please don't!"

[The2ndWheel]

19. We also believe that there is a north, south, east, and west

We all tell ourselves stories to make sense of the world. We all do it. We all bullshit ourselves every day.

[Forkboy]

21. Yes, but some do so far more so than others.

[mike_c]

28. not sure I understand your subject line....

There are real, formal definitions of north, south, east, and west. North is the region at the top of maps. South is at the bottom, and so on. :rofl:

OK, actually, north and south are opposite directions along the set of vectors parallel with the Earth's magnetic field, or with its axis of rotation, which are near enough to convergent-- at least at present-- to be used as such in many applications. East and west are opposing directions along the set of vectors orthogonal to the Earth's magnetic field or axis of rotation. Of course, all four terms are defined relative to an external condition or in terms of themselves, but that doesn't make them any less real, i.e. there really are two ends of each vector in the set of vectors parallel to the Earth's magnetic field, and so on. They don't have any implicit "northness" or "southness," but it certainly helps to reference them consistently!

Or did I completely miss your point? It wouldn't be the first time!

[The2ndWheel]

34. Flip a map upside down

Why do we look at a map the way we do?

Turn the solar system 90 degrees. Who's to say we can't look at the world a different way, and see the magnetic poles at the east and west ends of the planet?

Same thing with time. Why does everyone have to live on standard time? That's like making everyone pray to the same god. It just becomes so ubiquitous and conforming.

[mike_c]

36. sure, but there really is a set of vectors parallel with the axis...

...and so on. Sure, the names are arbitrary, and so is how we use them. Why not call them something and use them as consistent directional references? They're not imaginary-- they really exist.

Or do they? Halfway through this reply I realized the problem with that logic. They exist only in the way we conceptualize and visualize three dimensional space. They're not things one can point to and say "See? There's one of the infinite set of north-south vectors! Floating right there orthogonal to the set of east-west vectors!"

Excuse me, I have to go to a meeting, but afterward I'm going to give myself a headache about this.

OT, but a thought provoking discussion!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

66. OK, now I've got an upside down map.

What's your point?

We've still got North, South, East, and West.

[rebel with a cause]

37. I am one of thosepeople who have no concept of directions.

So North, South, East and West is to me a Fairy tale. Something that someone put on a map to show directions. But in my mind there is no direction except the one I'm going in. :eyes: :7

[alcibiades_mystery]

25. I doubt that number

Truly.

[ismnotwasm]

26. Sad and scary

You know,as an agnostic/atheist (depends on the day of the week, lol)I've never understood the need to limit a concept of "God" in that way. Why, if God is "unknowable" as well as "all powerful" or whatever, do these types insist they know God's methods? How dare they limit a Deity they profess to worship?

If you believe in the inerrency of the bible, you're spiritually as well an intellectually forced to believe this way, otherwise the inconsistencies in the bible challenge your faith I suppose. That just seems so sick and wrong to me, since their are plenty of inconsistencies no matter how it's interpreted.

Just finished Elaine Pagel's "Beyond Belief The Secret Gospels of Thomas" She's very good at retracing Christan history and the political needs of the early church. The conflict between the gospel of John and the left out gospel of Thomas is interesting, because seemingly, according to Thomas, Jesus was of the opinion that every person had a way to God inside them, and needed to look inward to find it,("If you bring forth what is within you, what you bring forth will save you. If you do not bring forth what is within you, what you do not bring forth will destroy you") as apposed to John, who did the whole "only salvation is through Jesus and Jesus is word and the word is God" thing.

Still, terrifying stats.

[Sebastian Doyle]

27. Some of these right wingers have taken a pseudo scientific approach to explaining Biblical things

I was having an insomniac episode the other night, so I was flipping through the TV channels. Mostly infomercials on at night, so first thing I found that wasn't that, was one of the Jesus channels. They were running a show on Noah's Ark. First they talked about all the expeditions up to Mt. Ararat and all the people who have allegedly seen the Ark up on top of that mountain. Then they switched gears into their theory of how the flood itself might have happened. They said that the pre-flood earth was probably one huge continental plate (they didn't use the name "Pangea", but same general idea, I guess) not only surrounded by oceans, but also floating on top of one. Then they took the scripture from Genesis.........

"In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened." - Genesis 7:11

....to say that God apparently triggered a huge push of geothermal energy, cracked the huge continent into pieces, the underground ocean all boiled up on top of the earth, and then the 40 days and 40 nights of rain came, which would have been the physical result of all that shit being forced up out of the ground anyway. They also claimed that meteorites are actually pieces of this planet that were shot out into space during this great cataclysmic event, and this was evidenced by salt and water being found within some meteorite fragments.

All very interesting hypothesis, and much of it sounds entirely possible. But what they did NOT mention was the question of whether Noah's boat would have actually been big enough to hold two of every life form on the planet. And they claimed that the "evidence" that the Ark story was true in turn "proves" the accuracy of the Genesis creation account, though they didn't offer any actual argument as to HOW that would be the case.

OK, so maybe there is a boat on top of a mountain....and maybe meteorites did originate from this planet....and most scientists believe that all land on this earth was connected originally. But what the fuck does any of that have to do with a naked chick talking to a fucking snake??

[Stellabella]

60. The problem with the 'waters boiled up'

is that they literally would have boiled. Destroying any life.

[spanone]

29. well, bu$h* got 2 terms

:shrug:

[iamahaingttta]

33. I think the universe is infinitely weirder...

...than in those old children's stories.

My God, if the fundies had any concept whatsoever about quantum mechanics and the like, their heads really would explode. Their mythologies are just so ho-hum compared to things like string theory. Even boring old evolution is so much more complex, interesting and strange than some sky-daddy just saying "let there be light!"

That said, I do believe there is probably a grain of truth to each and every one of those Bible stories. They didn't just make ALL of that shit up.

[rebel with a cause]

44. One thing that I always point out to people is that what we call the Bible

is not a direct translation from the original scrolls. It was translated and then changed to please the king/priests/rabbis of the time. Stories were enhanced to prove what was wanted proved. Scripture was added to forbid what was wanted forbidden. Scriptures were added to enable what was wanted to be allowed.

My favorite theory is about the story of David, and the fact that because he was "God's beloved" that he was allowed to do whatever he wanted and anyone who spoke out against him was punished. This story was used to have kings proclaimed the same and encouraged people to accept them living above the laws. The Bible has to be looked at like anything else, by its history, its purpose and its value. It can be exploited and used to control the masses. That is why it, and other books of religion, are not to be looked at as ways of life but ways of thinking. Just my thoughts of the moment.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

39. 60% probably don't know the meaning of "literally"

[RagAss]

63. HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAAH AHHAHHHHHHAHAAAAA

[Monk06]

40. Noah only took the baby animals. At least that's what Ken Hovind said

[YOY]

52. Because Ken was totally, like, right there!

He had his camcorder on and all.

[spoony]

42. Oh good, we're taking a break from the economy

Some good old fashioned religion bashing. By and by, let's say that poll is correct (I doubt it, but what the hell for the sake of argument), what exactly is gained during an election year by screaming like drunken banshees how stupid and mentally ill religious people are?

Big tent my ass.

[Evoman]

78. Do you believe that Noah's Ark is literally true?

[Better Believe It]

46. That Poll Is Absolutely Inaccurate: It's Nonsense!

According the poll, among people who profess no religion:

32% believe in the Red Sea parting.

24% believe in creationism.

29% believe the Noah's ark story is literally true!

Now how in the world can we trust those figures? That's nonsense. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone who is not religious believing such biblical stories are literally true.

[foxfeet]

61. I agree. Apparently the only choices were some variety of Christianity versus no religion at all.

They systematically excluded those who practice a religion other than one of the Abrahamic "big three," . For many people the Bible and its stories are not only not literal, they are just plain irrelevant.

[Arugula Latte]

49. Okay. Just shoot me in the head now, please.

Nation of imbeciles. :banghead:

[madinmaryland]

50. What is interesting is that many people will take something out of the bible,

and state that since it is in the bible, then it must be true. I guess then that what Rush Limbaugh say is true, because Rush Limbaugh said it. Oh never mind, there are a boat load of sheeple that do exactly that!

I have no idea what is true or not true from 4000 years back, as there is very little written history. Some has been found through archeaology and other types of discovery, but most of what was written is interpretations of what happened.

[PerfectSage]

51. Look on the bright side: 40% of Americans can think and chew gum at the same time.

[KG]

53. a myth right up there with bailout plan.

:P

[deaniac21]

54. 90% of the ME populace think jews blew the world trade center up.

[warren pease]

57. 72 percent of white American adult males think Orlando Florida is a Puerto Rican baseball player...

Well, not really, but the potential's there.

Thing is, with no real public educational system worthy of the name, with that self-congratulatory creation myth of American wonderfulness and superiority drummed into kids from their first moments of consciousness and reinforced by an entire infrastructure of orthodoxy works to replace creativity and curiosity with conformity and submission.

By the time the entire glob of organized bullshit gets through chewing them up and spitting them out, Americans who accept their own devolution end up diminished as human beings and far too invested in the parallel universe.

After decades of this abuse, it's understandable that millions of Americans wouldn't know up from down unless they dropped an anvil to see whether it breaks their toes or their skulls.

They become the ideal passive worker bee and consumption addict who does what he or she is told and asks no questions. Same characteristics that make Americans unusually susceptible to the more warped religious extremes where the vengeful, bigoted fundie loons tend to hang out.

So it's no surprise that the US is one of the most religious countries in the world. While religiosity in more normal countries has been declining for decades, in the US it's been growing like a noxious weed.

It's gotten so pervasive that the numbers are starting to correlate with some of the most primitive societies on earth. Not that "primitive" is necessarily bad, given that we're allegedly "advanced," but in this context primitive means religiosity in the 70 to 90 percent range. We're not quite there yet, but give it time, give pop culture a bit longer to rot the next generation's brains, and we'll make it yet.

Current studies say about 30 percent of Americans self-identify as evangelicals (code for "fundie loon"). That means next time you go to the store, roughly three in 10 of your fellow shoppers will be religiously insane. That's also right around Bush's baseline approval rating, give or take a couple of points. Coincidence?

A 2003 University of Michigan study concludes that:

About 46 percent of American adults attend church at least once a week, not counting weddings, funerals and christenings, compared with 14 percent of adults in Great Britain, 8 percent in France, 7 percent in Sweden and 4 percent in Japan.

“While traditional religious belief and participation in organized religion have steadily declined in most advanced industrial nations, especially in Western Europe, this is not the case in the United States,” said Ronald F. Inglehart, a researcher at the U-M Institute for Social Research (ISR), and director of the ISR World Values Surveys, which were conducted in more than 80 nations between 1981 and 2001.

Some possible reasons cited for the results: Religious refugees set the tone long ago in America; religious people tend to have more children than non-religious groups; and the U.S. has a less comprehensive social welfare system, prompting people to look to religion for help.

In other words, if you live in America v2.0, gawd help you because nobody else will.

As to the alleged social benefits of religion, a 2005 study published in the Journal of Religion and Society concludes that a high level of religiosity doesn't correlate with a healthy society.

It is commonly held that religion makes people more just, compassionate, and moral, but a new study suggests that the data belie that assumption. In fact, at first glance it would seem, religion has the opposite effect. The extensive study, "Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religiosity and Secularism in the Prosperous Democracies," examines statistics from 18 of the most developed democratic nations. It reveals clear correlations between various indicators of social strife and religiosity, showing that whether religion causes social strife or not, it certainly does not prevent it.

... the study shows a direct correlation between religiosity and dysfunctionality, which if nothing else, disproves the widespread belief that religiosity is beneficial, that secularism is detrimental, and that widespread acceptance of evolution is harmful.

Surveys show that many Americans agree "their church-going nation is an exceptional, God blessed, 'shining city on the hill' that stands as an impressive example for an increasingly skeptical world." This assumption flies in the face of the actual statistical evidence that Paul examined.

So that's good news for the future of the country. If the Bushies don't get you, the fundies will have the next try.


wp

[Stellabella]

59. Man, this is a dumb country.

[chupacabranation]

64. No. Way.

I don't want to believe this...it's making me sad...

[martymar64]

67. Show's how many people are stupid

They probably believe in a talking snake too.

I figures that ignorance is so rampant in a religion fit for slaves.

[deaniac21]

74. *4% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

[SmokingJacket]

75. See, I don't believe it -- makes no sense that 30% of people with NO religion

would believe the the Bible stories are literally true.

I mean... if *I* thought that God came down told Noah to build an ark, and he did, and that he somehow managed to fit all the animals on it... well, I'd turn in my Secular Humanist card immediately and go join a fundamentalist church!

I'd be more apt to believe that people don't know what "literally" means. You hear people saying all the time, "I'm so full I could literally explode..."

[JCMach1]

77. Didn't spot the Ark on Ararat last year in Armenia, nor did I see any Yetis

in Nepal this year...