Questions, Full story at http://www.physorg.com/news102700045.html

http://www.physorg.com/news102700045.html

"being raised in a home in which religion and religious practice were valued is the most important predictor of present religiosity among the subjects."

Raises a few good questions.

Is this a good thing? That children are involuntarily exposed to high-pressure conditioning before they"re old enough to reach an independent conclusion?

Can a person *really* divide an empirical professional life from a highly-subjective personal life?

This naturally leads us to ask about the employment demographics of scientists. How many academics and how many non-academics. Do non-academics have similar statistics? How does break down by discipline? .......

Twango

The study also seemed to imply that being raised in a religious household predisposed an individual to shy away from academia. Yet those individuals in this study still entered that field.

If they were subjected to "high pressure conditioning" and chose a conflicting path, then most likely the two can be separated.

I think we will hear more from Ecklund as she continues to analyze the vast amount of data she has collected.

I have a question -- why are there THREE PRO-RELIGION GOOGLE-SPONSORED ADS located between the headlines and the body of the text? Really tacky and obnoxious, not to mention obvious.

Getta grip, Saint Google.