No, it's not (at least for me.) I ****ing hate it when people use irrelevant credentials to project some sort of authority in the field in which I work. Kind of akin to a stolen-valor case, in a way.

Because I don't subscribe to Keynesian economic theory doesn't mean I don't understand its workings. My Masters of Business Administration certifies that I do indeed understand the basic fundamentals of John Maynard Keynes' brand of macroeconomics, but I consider myself more of a fan of Adam Smith, and ergo Milton Friedman's, monetarist economic teachings. In my limited exposure to what I'm sure you are expert in, I found myself relating better to Friedman than to Keynes.

As far as the Bible in the classroom goes, compulsory reading of the Bible on a daily basis was removed, effectively removing God from the classroom. Spin it any way you want. I have also seen the statistics from that time period and going forward, and there is more than enough evidence to support my claims of a correlation, if not to juvenile crime specifically, to crime and other undesirable results:

The educational standard of measure has been the SAT scores. SAT scores had been steady for many years before 1963. From 1963 they rapidly declined for 18 consecutive years, even though the same test had been used since 1941.

In 1974-75 the rate of decline of the SAT scores decreased, even though they continued to decline. That was when there was an explosion of private religious schools. There were only 1000 Christian schools in 1965. Between 1974 to 1984 they increased to 32,000.

• Before 1963 divorce rates had been declining for 15 years. After 1963 divorces increased 300% each year for the next 15 years.

• Since 1963 unmarried people living together is up 353%

• Since 1963 single parent families are up 140%.

• Since 1963 single parent families with children are up 160%.

• Since 1963 violent crime has increased 544%.

You just can't make this sh*t up.

I don't recall ever claiming to be an authority in either economics or criminology. I was just standing up for my own beliefs in what I thought was an A and B conversation. C your way out. My credentials are hard-earned, I guarantee you that though. I mean, I only have one Masters, not two. But I do hold three different degrees, but admittedly not in economics or poli sci or criminology. I personally don't give a crap where you work or what you do, but don't go putting me down to make yourself look smart, Bud.

How can you not be impressed with your own degrees? You worked hard to obtain them, didn't you? Seeing as how most people don't have a degree at all, I would think you would have some sense of pride of accomplishment. I fought through cancer radiation and chemo while continuing my Masters, knowing I faced heart surgery when I got done. Damn right I'm proud of what I accomplished. Most people I know are downright amazed at what I've gone through since last October.

I'm not impressed with either of mine from a 'major state university'. Plenty of idiots have degrees; plenty of highly intelligent people don't. A degree is more about money than ability. As long as the higher education system is confident that they can keep getting checks from you, or from some other party on your behalf, they'll get you through.

Do your arms ever hurt from patting yourself on the back so much? I thought you christians were supposed to be humble.

Careful, I think he belongs to a church with a long linage of snake handlers....:D

You may not be able to make that stuff up, but you are making up some fantasy that compulsory Bible reading being taken out of a classroom had anything to do with those things. Not to mention the fact that the practice is blatantly unconstitutional to begin with.

No-fault divorce laws had more to do with divorce increasing during the 70s and 80s. Divorce rates have been declining since the 90s and are at their lowest since the 70s as of a few years ago.

Oh no! Unmarried people living together! A conservative's worst nightmare! Who cares? People are also waiting longer to get married now and have kids later now.

Violent crime has actually been declining since the 80s, so I don't know how taking away prayer in schools in 1963 affects violent crime in 2012.

I can't believe there are people out there that really think prayer in schools will cure all of society's ills. The funny thing is that they're the same people prattling on about the Constitution all the time, like they really care if we follow it. They want THEIR beliefs adhered to, whether they're constitutional or not.

And Steve, if we're going to reinstate prayer in public schools, I assume it's okay if we include all religions? Hand out prayer mats and face Mecca in the morning...is that okay?

Yeah well, I have a PHD...Piled High and Deep (not to be confused with a PhD).

Except that somebody DID. This statement, quoted over and over and over, is a lie. If "the same test" was used year after year, cheating would be rampant. The test changed every year, including a drastic change in format in 1946, changes in timing and procedure in 1958, and more drastic changes in both questions, timing, and content in 1975. There are numerous studies on this (and if you are as educated as you claim, then these studies would have been readily available to you).

First - the educational standard of measure is NOT the SAT. The test is meant to predict the aptitude of a student - defined (by them) as the ability for an incoming student to complete college. It's historical predictive powers have been quantitatively invalid. High School grades alone have been a much more accurate predictor of whether the student will complete college. The ACT is 2nd. Demographics and income levels are a worse predictor than the ACT, but better than the SAT by orders of magnitude. Random selection comes in slightly BETTER than the SAT.

Second - in the 1950's and 60's, the taking of the SAT was not standard practice by the masses. It was traditionally taken only by students who already expected to excel - those students that were headed to college. An extreme minority of the population. Average scores decreased for almost 20 years as the test began being administered to more students - and not just the top students. Over those years, as well, the students to whom it was administered grew younger (it was initially only given to exiting seniors), until we reached today's "standard" of almost every high school junior taking the test.

Oh, and incidentally ... what the hell is a single parent family without children? I don't have the knowledge base background on this statistic that I do regarding the SAT... but the fact that they've given one percentage for single parent families, and a different one for single parent families with children, tells me the statistic is most likely completely fabricated. Care to point us to some independent verifiable source for these two numbers (and an explanation of what a parent without children could possibly mean - doesn't "parent" imply the existence of children???)

No, I don't care to discuss this issue any further. It is obvious that everyone just wants to disagree with me so what's the point. Publius, I wasn't aware that you had such hostility toward Christians. Which is capitalized by the way. I am not patting myself on the back, but lately I have gone through things most people could not have and still continue their education. I earned my degree, nobody "got me through." I got through with a whole lot of hard work. I have every right to feel good about my accomplishments, and don't really need the approval of a bunch of anonymous posters on an umpire site.

Well that's irritating.

And at least 95% of all those who abuse drugs started with mother's milk.

If that's the case, life must begin at erection..................:D

Yes, it is irritating, and conservatives are the best at it. I had someone on Facebook the other day post a picture of Obama and it had outright lies on it. It was about him commemorating D-Day and said he is the first president in 68 years to not do a public ceremony for D-Day. A quick Google search showed that GWB only recognized D-Day in 2001 and 2004. I pointed this out to the person who posted it, and all I got was what Steve posted above. "I'm done talking about it", "This is my opinion", "We can agree to disagree". I pointed out that you are entitled to opinions all you want, but you don't get to make up your own facts.

Steve, if you're going to make these outlandish claims, back them up. Don't go running once you get called on it. Also, no one said that you shouldn't feel good about your hard work in getting a degree. (Although I hardly think an MBA qualifies you as an economist, but that's just me)

Finally, the "hostility" toward Christians comes from Christians wanting things both ways. You never told me if praying to Mecca in public schools would be okay. Christians want us to adhere to the Constitution, but when we do, it sometimes goes against what they want, then they don't care as much about the Constitution anymore.

Did you ever think that a lot of people are disagreeing with you because what you posted is ridiculous?