SAY WHAT..?

Cat lovers less likely to go to church, research suggests

A US study finds that those who never set foot in a place of worship own two pets on average, while faithful worshippers have 1.4

Church-goers are less likely to own a cat than atheists - partly because some of the latter see cats as a "god substitute", according to research.
Owning a pet is said to replicate some of the benefits of joining a faith community, and while cats are "pretty low-maintenance, we end up serving them a lot", an American academic has pointed out.
A study of more than 2,000 people in the United States found that those who never set foot in a place of worship own two pets on average, while faithful worshippers have 1.4
It also noted a "strong, negative association between worship attendance and cat ownership", adding that "frequent worship attendees and the most conservative evangelicals report owning fewer pets".
Professor Samuel Perry, from the University of Oklahoma, said cats could be seen as a "god substitute".
"They want to interact with you but it's always on their terms and it's always about them," he said.
"We want to always win their affections and it bothers us when we think they might be somehow displeased with us.
"So while they're pretty low-maintenance, we end up serving them a lot. Cats are very godlike in those characteristics."
Professor Perry added that pets were "in some ways substitutes for human interaction".
He told The Times: "People who are heavily connected to a church or faith community already have plenty of social interaction."
The late writer Christopher Hitchens, an atheist, said that if you provide a dog with food and water, it will "think you are god".
Do the same for cats and "they draw the conclusion that they are god".
The research is published in the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion.

HEY YOU OUT THERE
YES YOU!
YOU BETTER TAKE THIS THREAD SERIOUSLY
GOT IT?



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

That Uplifting Tweet You Just Shared? A Russian Troll Sent It

Image
Here’s what Russia’s 2020 disinformation operations look like, according to two experts on social media and propaganda. By   DARREN LINVILL   &   PATRICK WARREN Internet trolls don’t troll. Not the professionals at least. Professional trolls don’t go on social media to antagonize liberals or belittle conservatives. They are not narrow minded, drunk or angry. They don’t lack basic English language skills. They certainly aren’t  “somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds,”  as the president once put it. Your stereotypical trolls do exist on social media, but the amateurs aren’t a threat to Western democracy. Professional trolls, on the other hand, are the tip of the spear in the new digital, ideological battleground. To combat the threat they pose, we must first understand them — and take them seriously. MORE: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/russia-troll-2020-election-interference-twitter-916482/ Posted by Jamie B.
Read more

The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term

Image
The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term   (Photo: Photos: Getty Images) Americans will almost certainly go to bed on Nov. 3 without knowing who won the presidential election. Since millions of people will vote by mail, constraints on time and resources will slow ballot counting into potentially a weeks-long process. Voting patterns suggest it’s likely that President  Donald Trump  could end Election Day in the lead in certain key states, only to be overtaken by Democratic opponent  Joe Biden  when more votes are tallied.  This could create a nightmare scenario during the three months stretching from Election Day to the Jan. 20 inauguration: a battle on the state and congressional level over who is the legitimate winner. This could include Congress reconvening on Jan. 6, presided over by Vice President  Mike Pence , with no consensus over its potential role in choosing the next president. This is arguably the most likely of th
Read more

Philosophical Question #14 – Lifestyle Choices

Image
Here is an interesting question in my list of philosophical questions: 1.) Should governments have penalties for those who live unhealthy lifestyles? A list of unhealthy lifestyles would include things like smoking, drinking, illegal drugs, prostitution, and other “vice” type activities. I guess the “government penalties” would be referring to monetary punishments, withholding medical treatments (insurance companies would love that), possibly imposing/regulating very high (exorbitant) prices on things considered unhealthy in order to cut down on their use, and other possibilities. 2.) Or, would you say that living an unhealthy lifestyle, likely resulting in a LOT of eventual personal pain and suffering, should be punishment enough for unhealthy lifestyles? When people make bad choices in life, often in their youth where ignorance and immediate gratification takes them over,  3.) Should a society be obligated to help "fix" them, by way of tax money?   Is that part of
Read more