Well I did and I thought we had this discussion in the past as well.

I can't say it was not only religion that was her reason but that would be unusual.

What I said was judges don't always tell you what they know or is said in chambers.

Start a thread about race and prisons then.

Indeed. There's a New Agey attitude that anything religious or 'spiritual' - whatever the f*** that means - is inherently benign. All the nasty stuff is dismissed as an extremist fringe or somehow not real religion.

Using that cretinous reasoning, Saudi Arabia isn't really a religious country. In which case, it's a bit of a mystery why they base all their barbaric laws on a religious text?

Do you not think this is another example of PC gone mad? You're religion or lack of should not be a deciding factor when you've knowingly broken the law, end of.

I don't need to.

I only need to point out that if you pick one thing and say that's a correlation, it may not be the significant one.

That's been the downfall of many medical studies, too, mistaking correlation for causation.

We have a legal system to determine whether or not someone is guilty. I'm not sure what your point is here... do you?

And I haven't tried at all, I googled religion in prisons. That was all the effort it took to dismiss claims by believers that prisoners are not religious.

The numbers of people in prison are also a fraction of those not in prison, so how exactly am I essentially criminalising the religious for my own purposes? Could you try and make more sense?

You could also say that the vast majority of black Protestants do not end up in prison.

See it depends how you look at statistics.

Maybe religion has helped many to deal with poverty and alienation.

Im not saying religious people are criminals or that their religion makes them criminals.

Only that our prisons are full of religious people. Which is supported by the stats. You and FZ seem to think I am tarring all believers with the same brush.

Then by all means move to north Korea to see what a shining example a completely atheist secular society can achieve.

Or you can accept the fact that however much you hate it, religious freedom is a part of secular democracy.

Maybe.

Or, maybe its kept millions in poverty.

Shame religious societies dont feel the same though?

North Korea was a laughable example.

You do love a bit of Whataboutism. While completely ignoring the whole point about the "they're not really religious" excuses made whenever atrocities are committed in the name of religion.

It's hard to give a coherent reply to what's essentially incoherent. Forgive me.

Now can you provide me with the links to show me where religious belief, that is the actual practice of moral, ethical or ritual doctrine is directly causal to criminal activity and prison populations.

Religious affiliation just means, I was baptised CofE then went on to mug pensioners for drug money. I ticked CofE on the box because it'll help with the parole board and it's nice to get out of my cell for an hour. That's evidence of nothing other than the will to believe what you want to make of it sorry.

Could you try and make more sense? =/= It's hard to give a coherent reply to what's essentially incoherent

So the prisoners are claiming religion out of non-religious self-interest? Meanwhile, the parole board take religion into account because it apparently makes people better?

Are you saying religion is great either way, whether it's being abused as an excuse or taken into account as a genuine benefit?

Well if whataboutism is about being able to respond in kind, you bet I do.

Is there some invoking of a rule that you can't have a fair balanced discussion with an atheist or something.

The fact is they're not really religious, if people rob and kill and abuse others for no good reason they're not being good Christians.

Of course if a man steals or sells drugs to feed his starving kids that's more understandable and more an indictment of the society he finds himself in. Although from an anti-theist point of view he's damned if he does or doesn't. He let his kids starve to death because of the laws made by the sky fairy, or he's a hypocrite for going against the laws he claims to try and live by.

If on the other hand he's dealing for the bling, the big car and to look like the big man, then no he's failed as a Christian.

Well one could get the impression that you are implying causality.

Blacks and Latinos (where religion is more inherent in the culture) are also more likely to go to prison than whites for the same crime.

So how does that change your conclusion? More blacks are in prison and they tend to be Protestant.

Fine if that's all you have.

Are the laws of Saudi Arabia really religious: YES or NO?

How am I saying that exactly.

Like anything it can be used for good, or abused for bad.

Parole boards take a lot of things into account, often quite mistakenly IMO.

But that is a part of the system, and people realise how to manipulate it.

As far as I'm aware, Yes.

By avoiding my very reasonable question you illustrate far more effectively than I could anxiety to defend religious privilege. Thanks; You have exceed my highest hopes.

Rather an unsupported comment about anxiety isn't it.

My comment was not actually about religion at all but about how judges usually operate and surprise that a judge would sentence on just one factor

I quite honestly disagree with Bolly on this one. I think some element of religious bias was at work here and it was wrong.

I honestly don't want to fall out with you but for Christ's sake, read some of the borderline hate talk that's being posted on this thread, and the back slapping agreement, not to mention the flimsy pseudoscientific justification of such.

Do you honestly wonder at the anxiety to defend when faced with this level of - I'm not even going to f**k around - bigotry that's being spewed out.

This is grass roots hatred and propaganda, we should be anxious.

I'm sorry if this offends you but this is how I feel.

The thing is if it were just religion that made her favor the defendent, I would think it wrong too. My point was more about the legal aspect because in a number of cases I know the judge has made the decision before they sit on the bench. They look at a lot of data and they don't always reveal it.

I wasn't saying she didn't just use religion, just that I'd be surprised.

Judges can also be influenced like anyone ( knows the barrister or some such).