I am not saying its a conspiracy inside the CIA, I’m just saying they are incorrect. They do not use direct French Surveys for this. They look at past censuses, and add in the average birth rate. This does not account for people converting, giving up their religion, or not being the religion of their Parents.
Fin, how often do censuses occur in France?
How much can the religious affiliations shift in what, five years?
I am not saying its a conspiracy inside the CIA, I’m just saying they are incorrect. They do not use direct French Surveys for this. They look at past censuses, and add in the average birth rate. This does not account for people converting, giving up their religion, or not being the religion of their Parents.
In fact they do not even use survey… i think the “germany” case is a good argument.
Fin, how often do censuses occur in France?
I don’t know
In fact they do not even use survey… i think the “germany” case is a good argument.
How do you know that the CIA does not use census? What else would they use?
How do you know Germany stats better than CIA?
Ha! I have found proof to deny your statement of saying “The Constitution’s laws against Religions were ment to stop a Church of England law”
Source: Book “Liberty, The American Revolution” Page 351, Last Paragraph.
“In Virginia, the Church petitioned Congress for a bill of new laws based on the Christian Religion…”, then later that paragraph “… The Congress unanimously voted against any laws based on the Christian Religion…”
This happened some time between the years of 1783 and 1788, though it doesnt say the exact year.
Ha! I have found proof to deny your statement of saying “The Constitution’s laws against Religions were ment to stop a Church of England law”
Source: Book “Liberty, The American Revolution” Page 351, Last Paragraph.
“In Virginia, the Church petitioned Congress for a bill of new laws based on the Christian Religion…”, then later that paragraph “… The Congress unanimously voted against any laws based on the Christian Religion…”
This happened some time between the years of 1783 and 1788, though it doesnt say the exact year.
not that it makes any difference, but is this not just an application of the Constitution in Virginia at the time? Or am i speaking out of ignorance?
At the Time, Virginia was the largest state, and had quite a bit of influence in Congress. After Years of the Articles of Confederation not working, and Congress not doing anything, Virginia started the process of a new Constitution with this proposal.
In fact they do not even use survey… i think the “germany” case is a good argument.
How do you know that the CIA does not use census? What else would they use?
How do you know Germany stats better than CIA?
You got lost somewhere, the stats bout germany IS BY THE CIA
SOFRES; that is an agencies that make survey. I do not say they are right, just less wrong than the CIA. Because they base their statistic on survey. We are speaking about OPINION, only survey can be of any interest on that. The CIA does not care about opinion, they don’t have time to loose with that, they just take general statistic about how people are born. Because i am, statisticly, as much christian as you are.
Look at germany in the CIA statistic…
Protestant 38%, Roman Catholic 34%, Muslim 1.7%, unaffiliated or other 26.3%…
Why so much unaffiliated in Germany ? Because germany is more atheist than France (in reality it is similar)? More religious diversity ?
Nein, that is because the CIA does not care about survey, they just look how people are born, and in east germany some are born atheist because of the communist, that is why there is more Unaffiliated in germany.
Exactly my point. Germany took the full brunt of the protestant reformation, and the ensuing religious wars. Bismarck tried to crush the Catholic Church in Germany. Germany was dominated for decades by the Nazis and later East Germany was owned by the Communists. And Germany is still 1/3 Catholic after all that.
Now look at France. France has gotten off easy as too factors which would suppress Catholicism. The Catholic pouplace rose up to fight the french revolution on more than one occaision. Napoleon even made peace with the Pope, whom he hated, becasue France is so Catholic. In fact they rose up when he had the Pope beaten and imprisoned.
That is why France is more CAtholic than Germany.
i’d always thought of Germany as being protestant (Luthren)/reformed (zwingli and other Dutch and Swiss reformers) far more than being Catholic. That doesn’t make sense to me. Although i see Europe as becoming less and less Catholic as “tradition” is being cast off, and (some) people start trying to make their own way.
South Germany is generally Catholic (Lichtenstein, Bavaria, Austria) while North Germany (Prussia) is generally Protestant.
Historicly you are right YB, but you are thinking like an american, french are not like that, they change very fast, maybe too fast sometime… France was really catholic not so long ago, but it is not the case now. We have no strong Catholic/Christian party, and if the stat said only 12% catholic it is becaue of an exageration of Agnostic, certainly due to the question… At the limit, an agnostic can be consider someone that is not sure. But as always i will argue your Statistics is invalid because there is no survey, and that is for that reason Germany get so much “Unnafiliated”, not because the communist convert a lot of people, (sure they did but not that much) but because the statistic only consider how people are born, i can assure you christianism is stronger in Germany than in France.
I am sure that i you had visit france you would understand how religion is weak. Church are never full, priest are getting really old and our politician never finish their speach with “que dieu bénisse la France”. As CC said, the “old world” start to let down tradition in general, after the WWII there was a renew in Europe.
Hey Horten, you’ve said it yourself. Europeans are more Liberal. Liberal means change. We’re a conservative country. We don’t change, they do.
“Hey Horten, you’ve said it yourself. Europeans are more Liberal. Liberal means change. We’re a conservative country. We don’t change, they do.”
Well, I wouldn’t say we’re conservative, otherwise I would see many of my programs being carried out. Also, the Democratic party has made quite a move in elected positions for the past years, narrowing the gap of the once strong Republican senate. And you have to remember, Bush was a minority president (though public opinion pulls would say differently today). But I will say that America is definitely less liberal then Europe as a whole.
@TG:
“Hey Horten, you’ve said it yourself. Europeans are more Liberal. Liberal means change. We’re a conservative country. We don’t change, they do.”
Well, I wouldn’t say we’re conservative, otherwise I would see many of my programs being carried out. Also, the Democratic party has made quite a move in elected positions for the past years, narrowing the gap of the once strong Republican senate. And you have to remember, Bush was a minority president (though public opinion pulls would say differently today). But I will say that America is definitely less liberal then Europe as a whole.
i think that even the democrats are, as a party, fairly conservative relative to Europeans and Canucks. Canada has a nice middle ground (some might say that the extremists average things out, but that’s not really fair . . . ).
“democrats are, as a party, fairly conservative relative to Canucks”
Whoa, that caught me as a bit odd - not that there’s anything wrong with it. So what would you Canucks call a Republican, a facist Nazi dictator? :roll:
@TG:
“democrats are, as a party, fairly conservative relative to Canucks”
Whoa, that caught me as a bit odd - not that there’s anything wrong with it. So what would you Canucks call a Republican, a facist Nazi dictator? :roll:
either that, or a former reformer/Canadian Alliance party member. They would certainly be to the right of the “Progressive Conservatives” - which was Canada’s conservative/right-wing party (before Reform/CRAP).
Also i meant “conservative relative to the Canucks” in general - obviously we have some wingnuts to both extremes. But take a look at our social programs, humanitarian aid programs, medicare, union strength, blah blah blah . . . . Just another reason why George Bush hates Jean Cretien - opposite ends of the political spectrum (although Cretien is much more “fascist dictator” than most world leaders . . . :) )
@cystic:
@TG:
“democrats are, as a party, fairly conservative relative to Canucks”
Whoa, that caught me as a bit odd - not that there’s anything wrong with it. So what would you Canucks call a Republican, a facist Nazi dictator? :roll:
either that, or a former reformer/Canadian Alliance party member. They would certainly be to the right of the “Progressive Conservatives” - which was Canada’s conservative/right-wing party (before Reform/CRAP).
Also i meant “conservative relative to the Canucks” in general - obviously we have some wingnuts to both extremes. But take a look at our social programs, humanitarian aid programs, medicare, union strength, blah blah blah . . . . Just another reason why George Bush hates Jean Cretien - opposite ends of the political spectrum (although Cretien is much more “fascist dictator” than most world leaders . . . :) )
I think Jean Cretien has brain cancer.
If there was ever a time for Canada to assassinate a Prime Minister, this is it.
“I think Jean Cretien has brain cancer.”
Whoa, don’t you guys have laws against this!? (us Americans have the unfit for duty clause). But to be fair, USA has had its share of “off” presidents. How old was Regan again when he left office? :wink:
@TG:
“I think Jean Cretien has brain cancer.”
Whoa, don’t you guys have laws against this!? (us Americans have the unfit for duty clause). But to be fair, USA has had its share of “off” presidents. How old was Regan again when he left office? :wink:
He doesnt really have brain cancer.
But, if you ever see him talk, you will think his does.
