I read something the other day that struck a chord, and put a lot of things in perspective. The article was actually contrasting the world views of the "average" Republican (a majority of whom are Christians, many evangelical/fundamentalist) vs. the "average" Democrat (many of whom are atheist/agnostic). While I don't necessarily accept these generalizations, because there are Atheist Republicans and Christian Democrats, I think it is actually a very legitimate observation of the contrast between evangelical/fundamentalist Christian and atheist/agnostic world views. The article posited that the evangelical/fundamentalist Christian world view believes that humans are born into this world as flawed beings, prone to sin and evil and cursed to a pain filled life and eternal damnation. They can only be "saved" from this natural state of sin and evil by accepting their particular savior and following the dictates of their particular ancient book. Their outlook tends to focus on the bad in themselves and in other people, and how to induce or force them to change those things. They tend to be very concerned with having a strong military, not just for defense, but to exert dominion over the rest of the world; they tend to advocate longer prison sentences for criminal offenders and overwhelmingly support the death sentence, often advocating it for much less serious offenses than it is now applied to. They want the government to control what they perceive as sinful behavior of the populace (think sodomy laws, blue laws, prohibition in the past; gay marriage, bathroom laws, abortion in the present), regardless of whether it conflicts with the Constitution or its interpretation by the Supreme Court. They tend to want the government to protect their ability to accumulate wealth, but to keep its hands off of the sacrosanct free market system. Atheists/agnostics on the other hand, many of whom are Humanists, believe that humans are born into this world innocent, good and with the full potential of human beings. They tend to focus on the good in people and their potential as humans, and encouraging and protecting the individuals right to develop that potential. They tend to look at our criminal justice system, and want to put more emphasis on rehabilitation and not so much on punishment/retribution. They tend to believe that the death penalty is wrong, not because some crimes don't demand it, but because of the potential of error, and the history of the harshest penalty being used primarily for minorities and the indigent. They want the government to protect the rights of those who don't look like or believe like the majority and those who don't necessarily adopt the "traditional" life style. They tend to believe the government's role is to ensure fairness in the economic arena. I realize these are generalizations, and I realize they are not 100% accurate and that any one individual may not fit these patterns. But I think overall it is a pretty accurate assessment of the differences between two world views. Kind of a glass half empty vs. a glass half full analogy. Any thoughts?