Talk:Bible Belt

	This Christianity related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)

Telling graphics

Unfortunately it's off imgur, so I'm not certain of the original site and I'm too lazy to look it up right now without a plan to add it to the article. -- Seth Peck (talk) 22:04, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Redefining the Bible Belt

Huffington Post has an interesting article today about the concentration of Christian identification in the United States...which suggests the Bible Belt actually goes through the center of the country rather than over the The South (here's the exact graphic). The fact that it somewhat follows the NAFTA Superhighway is interesting, but probably not related. -- Seth Peck (talk) 16:59, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't get something. the rates for Christian adherence are highr in the cities than in the states as a whole, but you'd really expect the reverse, with religious identity being stronger in rural than urban areas. Have they collated their statistics the same way for each list? Sophie^Wilder 18:02, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I only took a quick peek, but given that the article from which the graphic is drawn is titled "Most And Least Christian Cities In America," I imagine the "urban bias" (to quote a term from a completely different field) is built into the study. OnTheInternetNobodyKnowsYou'reAGod (talk) 18:12, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I suspect this graphic takes into account denominations not typically associated with the Bible Belt. Another problem with this demographically analysis is that it looks at church attendance, not necessarily religion. Public opinion of churches, even among the religious, is pretty low. Of course, taking that into account makes the Bible Belt a lot bigger; my region isn’t considered Bible Belt in either of these maps, but I’ll tell you atheists are a minority here. They have fundie groups in the public schools here, which you don’t see where I’m from originally (Boston). 2607:FB91:1988:E689:C0F2:4C9:A549:D2CA (talk) 21:50, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Which bible

... does the BB use? (Ambiguity intended)

Given the variant number of component books, and variant readings there will be problems ahead (but no music and no dance) 171.33.222.26 (talk) 15:11, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

The King James Bible appears to be the most favored. --TheLateGatsby (The end of the dock ) 15:24, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

So they can be bible-bashed with 'assorted variant canons' (if not the 3Groschen-Opera Canon Song). 171.33.222.26 (talk) 16:26, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

I swear my county is a mini Bible Belt

If you happen to be in Mid-Michigan, then you know what I am talking about. So many damn Christian churches. Hell, the nearest non-Christian center of worship is about 20 miles away from where I live (and it is a Mosque) --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 18:55, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Unnecessarily Condescending

I understand that the wiki here isn't necessarily meant to be 100% neutral, but the language in this article goes beyond snark or sarcasm. Critiquing the ideology of US protestants is one thing, but critiquing an entire region with millions of people as if it is completely homogeneous is another. Additionally, the mocking of people in the South for having high crime and/or divorce rates is pretty cruel when you consider those factors are highly correlated with poverty. And to be frank, the intro is a gross exaggeration. 25 February, 2018 ^{— Unsigned, by: Greenesttomato / talk / contribs}

RationalWiki has been half Wikipedia half Uncyclopedia for years. Stop trying to take the funny out. 2607:FB91:1988:E689:C0F2:4C9:A549:D2CA (talk) 21:38, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Calling people in states "lol fat" and "lol low IQ" is not funny nor is it good critique. Calling several states mired in problems "infections" is not funny nor good critique. The same goes for this site's history describing female pundits as "horses" or having a fun page on "Conservative hotties" (Fun talk:Conservative hotties) which may be more acceptable years ago, but not so any more. We removed categories like "Insufferable assholes", "Conservative wingnuttery", as well etc. We still have snark in articles, but they have to be aimed at the right targets, not (in this case) these low effort jabs that cast nets too wide and blanket disparage and stereotype entire groups of people just for living in states that vote certain ways. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 21:51, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

What you are doing is equivalent to trying to turn a Power Wheels designed for little kids to play with into a vehicle for highway travel. If you don’t like the sense of humor here, go away and start a new wiki from scratch. Tired of seeing this bullshit. 2607:FB91:1988:E689:C0F2:4C9:A549:D2CA (talk) 21:56, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

That doesn't counter anything I said, just you expressing a personal dislike of how I edit and resorting to misconstruing my edits as "taking the funny out". I'm building a wiki, been active since 2014, for roughly 8 years now (speaking of being accused of being new guard, when do I stop being "new guard"); you're under an anonymous IP lecturing me how a wiki is ought to be run while assuming the community ideals and practices have stagnated since. If you don't like the trajectory and are "sick of bullshit" maybe try be a more active user during those transitive 8+ years, you could've influenced it much more effectively rather than go in now and complain about me. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 22:02, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Love the ad hom. So rational. Vee (talk) 22:12, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Ah, you’re so much better than I am because you have an account. Fuck off with that elitist attitude, I was here back when Trent and PalMD were active, I just forgot my password and refuse to start over. The whole point of the site is to mock people like these creatures you are trying to defend. 172.58.128.92 (talk) 22:14, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

"I just forgot my password and refuse to start over." So there you go. You could create a new account, get your contributions merged to that account, get your account renamed. You didn't bother and went inactive for years. You're in no position to complain. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 22:18, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

What exactly makes you think I have been inactive? I edit off and on. You don’t like it that we called women degrading things like “horses”? Guess what, all females from Columbus to El Paso to Key West are cunts (including my ex wife from New Orleans). Yes, I just used the C-word, cunt cunt cunt. 2607:FB91:1988:E689:C0F2:4C9:A549:D2CA (talk) 22:25, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Pretty obvious this user isn't here in good faith. Vee (talk) 22:33, 2 January 2023 (UTC)