Florida’s Lt. Gov. Turns Preacher »« Miami Police Beat Up Man With Down Syndrome

Religion and the Death Penalty

In the wake of the execution of Troy Davis, Christopher Hitchens ties America’s use of the death penalty to the continuing influence of religion:

The reason why the United States is alone among comparable countries in its commitment to doing this is that it is the most religious of those countries. (Take away only China, which is run by a very nervous oligarchy, and the remaining death-penalty states in the world will generally be noticeable as theocratic ones.)


China is indeed the exception, but not nearly as exceptional as it appears. One of the arguments used by the Christian right all the time is that atheism leads to genocide because of the actions of officially atheist communist nations like the Soviet Union and China. But the key factor with those nations was not that they’re atheist but that they’re communist, and communism operates, in actuality rather than in theory, as a religion.

In both China and the former Soviet Union, all of the usual roles of religion were played by the state instead. The state, rather than the church, defines (or defined) everything of importance in the lives of the populace. It was (is) a totalizing ideology that takes away the identity of the individual in much the same way religion does, substituting devotion to the state for devotion to God.

It should also be said that there is not only a difference between having a secular government (which is what atheists generally want) and having a government that enforces atheism as a matter of law (which is something that no atheist I know of wants).

Anyway, back to Hitchens’ point. The United States is alone among western democratic nations to still employ execution. It is also alone among those nations by having religion be a huge influence on policy. This is hardly a coincidence. But it’s also the root of so many other terrible public policies. Only in America do we fund something as inane as abstinence-only sex ed. Only in America is their such controversy over gay rights. The influence of religion on public policy in the United States is almost uniformly bad.

Comments

  1. slc1 says

    The late Martin Gardner used to argue that the philosophy behind Communism, Dialectical Materialism, was virtually akin to a religion as, like religion, it accepted belief with no evidence.

  2. Infophile says

    China isn’t the only exception – Japan still has the death penalty as well, and it’s not nearly as religious a state as the US, nor as totalitarian as China. I suspect the death penalty there is more a cultural relic, perhaps combined with American influence post-WWII, but I don’t want to make a strong statement on that without further study.

    Is there anyone here who knows more about the history of the death penalty in Japan who might be able to shed more light on the issue?

  3. 386sx says

    But the key factor with those nations was not that they’re atheist but that they’re communist, and communism operates, in actuality rather than in theory, as a religion.

    If I were religious I would call bullpucky on this popular Hitchinsism. Then on the other hand if I were religious I would talk to invisible people and try and make them “poof” stuff all the time. I would be very goofy and silly if I were religious.

  4. hinschelwood says

    @386sx

    This particular Hitchinsism is actually from Bertrand Russell, The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism:

    Bolshevism as a social phenomenon is to be reckoned as a religion, not as an ordinary political movement. [...] By a religion I mean a set of beliefs held as dogmas, dominating the conduct of life, going beyond or contrary to evidence, and inculcated by methods which are emotional or authoritarian, not intellectual. By this definition, Bolshevism is a religion: that its dogmas go beyond or contrary to evidence, I shall try to prove in what follows. Those who accept Bolshevism become impervious to scientific evidence, and commit intellectual suicide. Even if all the doctrines of Bolshevism were true, this would still be the case, since no unbiased examination of them is tolerated. One who believes, as I do, that the free intellect is the chief engine of human progress, cannot but be fundamentally opposed to Bolshevism, as much as to the Church of Rome.

    This was from 1920.

  5. karmakin says

    Well, generally speaking it is an issue of overt authoritarianism, where as the state really is acting in the same fashion as a religion.

  6. slc1 says

    Re Infophile @ #2

    It would appear that capital punishment in Japan bears some resemblance to capitol punishment in California. Many are sentenced but few are actually executed (Some prisoners sentenced to be executed in California have been on death row for what seems like forever. Richard Ramirez, the night stalker, has been there for nearly 22 years. It would surprise no one if Scott Peterson, who has been on death row for 6 years died of old age before the state gets around to administering the lethal injections).

  7. dafydd says

    @infophile

    I’ve just had a quick look on wikipedia, and while Japan does have the death penalty it isn’t used very much – 4-5 executions per year since 1993, all for murder, usually multiple counts and /or with aggravating factors such as rape or robbery. Compare that to going on 300 executions in Texas since 2000 alone, from a population only one-fifth the size. I can’t speak to the historical factors involved in Japan’s use of the death penalty, or how well they do on convicting innocent people, but they’re nowhere near as rope-happy as certain US states.

    Also, scanning the list of executees since 1993 gave me the distinct impression that they were all ethnically Japanese. I don’t know what proportion of the Japanese population isn’t ethnically Japanese, but they certainly don’t seem to be disproportionately executing minorities like the US.

  8. eric says

    The PEW research on this subject has some interesting, albeit mixed results. It does report religion as a primary influence on death penalty views. However, U.S. support for the death penalty – even amongst liberals and even amongst agnostics, atheists, and “nothing in particulars” (i.e. the folks who answered ‘unaffiliated’) – is still >50%. In fact, in 2010, the % unaffiliated who were supportive/opposed the death penalty was the same as the general population: about a 60% for, 30% against split.

    IOW, if every American suddenly became a liberal atheist American, the majority of Americans would still favor the death penalty.

    Without knowing the numbers in other western democracies, I would guess this is still comparably very high. So it’s not just or even mostly religion in this case, it’s broader cultural differences.

  9. jamessweet says

    I’ve written about this idea before, that there really is no such thing as “secular totalitarianism”. It is an oxymoron. You can have atheistic totalitarianism, of course, if you are using the dictionary definition of “atheist”, but for many of us who self-identify as atheist, that part of our identity comprises much more than simply a lack of belief in god(s), and would have to reject totalitarianism as well.

    We are verging dangerously close to No True Scotsman territory here in making these assertions, but I think they are ultimately supportable. Totalitarianism of any stripe functions in practice exactly like a fundamentalist theocracy — its just that their ludicrously false truth claims tend not to be specifically supernatural (though North Korea’s “Juche” shows even that is not always the case!)

    I suppose we could imagine a sort of dystopian totalitarian “science-based” society, where policy decisions are driven by evidence rather than by faith in an ideology, and yet those policy decisions are still enforced in a totalitarian manner (China seems to be moving in this direction as the communist experiment shows itself to be a failure). But I would argue that such a society would be non-evidence-based in a very important way, and that being that humans are just naturally unhappy and tend to behave badly when oppressed by a totalitarian regime.

    In any case, for me, being an atheist means opposing any sort of unsubstantiated “revealed truth”, and that includes absolutist political ideology. I think I can dodge the No True Scotsman fallacy by saying that this is not the case for all who would fit the dictionary definition of “atheist”, but that I simply don’t identify in anyway with those folks.

  10. dingojack says

    Infophile – “… Japan still has the death penalty as well, and it’s not nearly as religious a state as the US… ”
    Are there any stats out there to confirm or deny this claim?
    Dingo

  11. says

    Huge amounts of guns, high homicide rates (much of which is over drugs) and institutionalised death penalty which apparently costs more than imprisoning a person for life.

    Let’s not go to America, ’tis a silly place.

  12. tacitus says

    There are actually three stable democratic nations that actively use the death penalty — Japan, Taiwan, and Singapore, although calling Singapore a democracy is a bit of a stretch since it’s been an authoritarian one-party state for decades. Case in point, it’s not actually known how many executions Singapore does since they keep the numbers under wraps.

    But it doesn’t really matter. In terms of the number of executions, the USA is the one democracy that rubs shoulders only with dictatorships, failed states, and near failed states. Unfortunately, the insular conservative right is adept at ignoring (and downright rejecting) comparisons of the American experience with our sister democratic countries, as all the demonizing of national healthcare systems in recent times demonstrates. Indeed, for many, there are nowhere near enough executions.

    But I don’t think religion is necessarily the root cause. I suspect that it’s conservatism, and that would explain why Japan, Taiwan, and especially Singapore are on the list. The US has one of the most authoritarian judicial systems in the world, especially when you consider how out of whack the number of people who are incarcerated with the rest of the world. The US system is also one of the more punitive in the democratic world, given the harshness of the sentencing and the focus on punishment as opposed to reform and rehabilitation. And even though this system is failing America and creating more victims, conservative Americans like it that way. One can never spend enough money punishing miscreants and criminals, and never too little money helping them in any way.

    Finally, I would like to point out that the nature of the US political system has also made a big difference. Support for the death penalty in the UK is still over 50%, and not that far off US numbers. In 1995, when the death penalty was last debated in the British Parliament, support was as high as 76%. But the key is that the vote on that occasion (and on others) was a free vote — no party whip — and the majority of MPs voted against the wishes of their constituents to maintain the ban on the death penalty, as had happened several times before.

    People in many other democracies also favor the death penalty, but the leaders (conservative as well as liberal) have still rejected its use. They are leading from the front as general support is steadily declining.

    I can’t imagine anything like that happening in Congress.

  13. lofgren says

    So the operational definition of religion is now “a totalizing ideology that takes away the identity of the individual?” That’s interesting because it redefines religion in such a way that most of the beliefs I would have previously called religions are no longer religions. Neither my grandmother’s Catholicism nor my mother-in-law’s Methodism could be fairly called “totalizing ideolog(ies)” that have taken away their identities. In fact, aside from hardcore fundamentalism and most cults, Ed Brayton has probably reduced the number of religions believers on this planet to a tiny fraction of what it was when I started reading this post, even despite the billion+ Chinese people he added to the lists.

    This is such a lazy claim by atheists. It makes us look incredibly slimy and dodgy, and to most people it seems like we are redefining our terms in the middle of an argument. Communism is not a religion in the way that 99% of the planet define the word. This is the same kind of special pleading that Christians use when they say that the terrorists who bomb abortion clinics are not “real true Christians.” “Oh, the Soviet Union? They weren’t Real True Atheists, so we can actually blame their actions on religion!”

    Those of us who oppose religion should be able to own up to the fact that an ideology does not have to be religions to be oppressive, violent, or destructive. Communism (as practiced in the Soviet Union) is a totalizing ideology that takes away the identity of the individual, which should provide ample reason for liberals and humanists to oppose it regardless of whether or not it is a religion. Communism encourages adherence to practices and beliefs that are contrary to observable reality if they are convenient for the state, so that should be enough for skeptics and rationalists to criticize it and debunk it. There are multiple facets of communism as practiced in the USSR (and most other times and places) that make it worthy of opposition by atheists and the atheist-adjacent. We don’t have to make ourselves sound like toddlers by slapping ebil weligion stickers on everything we don’t like.

    Soviet-style communism is bad. But to say that it “operates as a religion” is to redefine religion in a way that is unrecognizable to most people, and to say that a religion is “a totalizing ideology that takes away the identity of the individual” is a grievous insult in my opinion to most religious people.

  14. brandon says

    Ooh, are we playing the unsubstantiated correlation game? My turn!

    The United States is the most religious Western democracy. The United States also drinks more coffee than any other nation. Holy crap, religion causes coffee!

  15. says

    @lofgren

    I concur that calling communism a religion is probably too far. Instead it seems more proper to say that atheists in general are opposed to beliefs, dogmatically held in spite of the evidence (or in lieu of it) which would include religion but also many/all totalitarian political systems.

  16. Dennis N says

    Wowow, no one here claimed that Communism is a religion. The claim is that Communism in practice operated very much like a religious state. Attack that rather than a one-to-one equating of religion and Communism as an exact match.

  17. says

    @Dennis N:

    Wowow, no one here claimed that Communism is a religion.

    I think people are referring, at least in part, to this:

    communism operates, in actuality rather than in theory, as a religion

  18. Abby Normal says

    I just threw together a quick spreadsheet to bring together death penalty data and religious affinity by state. Some key highlights, the top 11 most religious states all have the death penalty. They account for 39.1% of the national death row population and 67.4% of the executions last year. However, it should be noted that Texas, ranked 11th in religiosity, accounts for 10.1% of the death row population and 37% of the executions by itself. On the other side, of the 11 least religious states 5 have the death penalty. They account for 1.6% of the death row population and didn’t execute anyone last year.

    A couple of other noteworthy outliers, Ohio had the second highest number of executions last year. It’s ranked 25th in religiosity. California has by far the greatest number of death row inmates at 721, California is 35th in religiosity. Second goes to Florida with 398 and they’re ranked 20th.

    So, there does seem to be some correlation between religion and affinity for the death penalty. But if we’re looking for causal relationships, there are definitely other factors at play. If I had to guess, I would say that in the US religiosity and death penalty affinity are both driven by a broader cultural influence, a set of attitudes or values that push people toward both, rather than one causing the other. If I were to continue I’d look for ways to quantify the cultural value place on tradition and deference to one’s elders as potentially drivers.

    The following is my spreadsheet in comma separated format, so anyone who is interested in can throw it into Excel. The source for the death penalty data came from The Death Penalty Information Center (which contains its own citations). The religious ranking is from The Pew Research Center

    State,Death Penalty,Death Row Pop. As of 1/1/11,% of National Death Row Pop.,2010 Executions,% of National Executions,Religious Rank,% Saying Religion is Very Important
    Mississippi,Yes,60,1.9%,3,6.5%,1,82%
    Alabama,Yes,206,6.5%,5,10.9%,2,74%
    Arkansas,Yes,43,1.3%,0,0.0%,3,74%
    Louisiana,Yes,86,2.7%,1,2.2%,4,73%
    Tennessee,Yes,87,2.7%,0,0.0%,5,72%
    South Carolina,Yes,63,2.0%,0,0.0%,6,70%
    Oklahoma,Yes,77,2.4%,3,6.5%,7,69%
    North Carolina,Yes,165,5.2%,0,0.0%,8,69%
    Georgia,Yes,103,3.2%,2,4.3%,9,68%
    Kentucky,Yes,36,1.1%,0,0.0%,10,67%
    Texas,Yes,321,10.1%,17,37.0%,11,67%
    Utah,Yes,9,0.3%,1,2.2%,12,66%
    Kansas,Yes,9,0.3%,0,0.0%,13,61%
    Nebraska,Yes,12,0.4%,0,0.0%,14,61%
    West Virginia,No,0,0.0%,0,0.0%,15,60%
    Indiana,Yes,14,0.4%,0,0.0%,16,60%
    Missouri,Yes,50,1.6%,0,0.0%,17,59%
    Virginia,Yes,11,0.3%,3,6.5%,18,59%
    Idaho,Yes,16,0.5%,0,0.0%,19,58%
    Florida,Yes,398,12.5%,1,2.2%,20,57%
    Maryland,Yes,5,0.2%,0,0.0%,21,56%
    South Dakota,Yes,3,0.1%,0,0.0%,22,56%
    North Dakota,No,0,0.0%,0,0.0%,22,56%
    Hawaii,No,0,0.0%,0,0.0%,23,55%
    Delaware,Yes,20,0.6%,0,0.0%,24,55%
    Ohio,Yes,159,5.0%,8,17.4%,25,55%
    Pennsylvania,Yes,219,6.9%,0,0.0%,26,54%
    Michigan,No,0,0.0%,0,0.0%,27,54%
    Illinois,No,16,0.5%,0,0.0%,28,53%
    New Mexico,No,2,0.1%,0,0.0%,29,53%
    New Jersey,No,0,0.0%,0,0.0%,30,52%
    Minnesota,No,0,0.0%,0,0.0%,31,52%
    Iowa,No,0,0.0%,0,0.0%,32,51%
    Arizona,Yes,138,4.3%,1,2.2%,33,51%
    Nevada,Yes,81,2.5%,0,0.0%,34,50%
    California,Yes,721,22.6%,0,0.0%,35,48%
    Washington,Yes,9,0.3%,1,2.2%,36,48%
    Wisconsin,No,0,0.0%,0,0.0%,37,47%
    Montana,Yes,2,0.1%,0,0.0%,38,47%
    Wyoming,Yes,1,0.0%,0,0.0%,38,47%
    New York,No,0,0.0%,0,0.0%,39,46%
    Oregon,Yes,34,1.1%,0,0.0%,40,46%
    Colorado,Yes,4,0.1%,0,0.0%,41,44%
    Connecticut,Yes,10,0.3%,0,0.0%,42,44%
    Rhode Island,No,0,0.0%,0,0.0%,42,44%
    Maine,No,0,0.0%,0,0.0%,43,42%
    Massachusetts,No,0,0.0%,0,0.0%,44,40%
    Alaska,No,0,0.0%,0,0.0%,45,37%
    New Hampshire,Yes,1,0.0%,0,0.0%,46,36%
    Vermont,No,0,0.0%,0,0.0%,46,36%

  19. tacitus says

    I tend to agree that religion is not the root cause here, it’s conservatism and (despite the claims of Tea Partiers) the conservative’s love for authoritarian solutions to the problems of crime and punishment.

    In their worldview, it doesn’t matter that focusing on the reform and rehabilitation of criminals and drug offenders has been clearly demonstrated to be a far better solution than punitive sentencing and prison conditions (e.g. Norway’s far lower rate of recidivism, and Portugal’s great success in treating drug offenders instead of imprisoning them), it’s just not right to spend our tax dollars “rewarding” them for their bad behavior, no matter how much better off we would be if we did it.

    Yesterday I just spoke to a nurse who works with drug abusers who are at risk of going to jail if they don’t clean up. The Texas State Government has been slashing their budget, even though almost everyone who fails their program has a high risk of going to prison, and costing the taxpayers far more than it would to boost the rehab success rate.

    Overwhelming support for the death penalty (in spite of it’s many acknowledged inequities and flaws) is merely another aspect of the conservative minds need to see wrong-doers punished (and not seen to be rewarded in any small way).

  20. lofgren says

    Wowow, no one here claimed that Communism is a religion. The claim is that Communism in practice operated very much like a religious state. Attack that rather than a one-to-one equating of religion and Communism as an exact match.

    Even that goes too far. Atheists have no religion. Without a supernatural component, I think most people would have a hard time buying that something is a religion without a supernatural component, some force or entity that lacks a natural explanation, whose features are a necessary component of the initialization or maintenance of some natural phenomenon.

    I object to the notion that 1. Communism “operates… as a religion” because it is a “a totalizing ideology that takes away the identity of the individual in much the same way religion does.” Indubitably, some religions operate that way, but not all. “A totalizing ideology that takes away the identity of the individual” is neither a sufficient nor necessary component of a religion. If you say that something is “a totalizing ideology that takes away the identity of the individual,” you are saying that it operates similarly to some religious ideologies, but also similar to many other ideologies. It’s not reasonable to redefine all “totalizing ideologies” as religions, unless we want to use that as our definition of religion going forward, in which case many people who would call themselves atheists are no longer atheists and many people who would call themselves religious are not longer religious by our new definition.

  21. lofgren says

    I blockquoted the wrong post there. I meant to quote this one:

    I concur that calling communism a religion is probably too far. Instead it seems more proper to say that atheists in general are opposed to beliefs, dogmatically held in spite of the evidence (or in lieu of it) which would include religion but also many/all totalitarian political systems.

  22. lofgren says

    In retrospect my post at 24 is rife with errors. I apologize for that. I think it is still comprehensible so I’m not going to rewrite it right now. In the future I will lrn 2 prevu.

  23. tacitus says

    If I had to guess, I would say that in the US religiosity and death penalty affinity are both driven by a broader cultural influence, a set of attitudes or values that push people toward both, rather than one causing the other.

    Agreed, and it’s call conservatism. The direct causal link between religion and support for the death penalty gets much weaker when you look at the stats in other countries — like the UK, for example. Support for the death penalty is far higher in the UK than the number of religious adherents (at least double) and the difference used to be even greater than that.

    If I were to continue I’d look for ways to quantify the cultural value place on tradition and deference to one’s elders as potentially drivers.

    Other things that conservatives place a high value on.

    To give conservatives the benefit of the doubt, it’s always possible that rather than support for the death penalty being derived from an innate conservative value, it could be that continuing conservative support for the death penalty is derived from that value they place on tradition, and that resistance to abolishing it is more to do with resistance to change than a fundamental belief that the death penalty is necessary.

    After all, only 15 years ago, 75% of all Brits were in favor of bringing back the death penalty, but today it’s only around 55%, which would lead one to believe that it’s not that easy even for moderates and liberals to abandon support for the centuries-old form of punishment.

  24. says

    @lofgren – are you sure you were responding to me?

    Even that goes too far

    It seems like we are in agreement, but your initial sentence indicates otherwise. In what way does what I say ‘go too far’? I appreciate you have admitted to a number of errors in your post, so I’m unsure now what’s an error and what you might like me to respond too :)

  25. Dennis N says

    I believe lofgren was responding to this by me:

    Communism in practice operated very much like a religious state.

  26. lpetrich says

    Bertrand Russell in his History of Western Philosophy (1944) wrote some more on the quasi-religious nature of Marxism:

    To understand Marx psychologically, one should use the following dictionary:
    Yahweh=Dialectical Materialism
    The Messiah= Marx
    The Elect=The Proletariat
    The Church=The Communist Party
    The Second Coming=The Revolution
    Hell=Punishment of the Capitalists
    The Millennium=The Communist Commonwealth

  27. lofgren says

    In what way does what I say ‘go too far’?

    I think it goes too far to say that atheists “in general are opposed to beliefs, dogmatically held in spite of the evidence (or in lieu of it) which would include religion but also many/all totalitarian political systems.”

    I know a lot of atheists, as I have defined them (people who lack a religion), but I could not say that they are all opposed to beliefs held despite a lack of evidence. I could not even say that they are opposed to religion. My uncle honestly believes that someday descendents of the Nazis will return from the center of the earth with superpowers they learned from the “energy beings” who live there, and that this is something we as a society should be preparing for by training an elite corps of pacifist soldiers to meditate the problem away. He’s still an atheist – he has no religion, doesn’t believe in gods, or believe that our moral choices influence our place in the afterlife or our environment, doesn’t even believe in objective morality, and believes that all of his loony conspiracy theories can and will have natural, scientifically verified explanations, and that evidence of them is already available (although naturally it takes the brilliant mind of a caterer obsessively scanning internet conspiracy websites to piece it together) – even though we otherwise share almost none of the same beliefs. I know atheists who are 9/11 truthers, who believe in vital energies, who believe that Frankenfood engineers will kill us all with mind controlling tomatoes. Atheism is a broad term, about as broad as “Christian,” and it tells you about as much about a person to apply that label.

  28. says

    @lofgren

    As someone who is psychotic, I also believe many strange or unusual things in spite of the evidence. Trust me when I assure you that I am not denying the existence of atheists that believe strange things with no or insufficient supporting evidence.

    Nevertheless I was talking about generalities. I concur there are many atheists who are not opposed to dogma, but I think as a generalisation it still holds. Even if they believe strange things, and do so dogmatically – they tend to, upon being asked, have a negative opinion of dogmatic views.

    My position is that everybody is a delusional about something or somethings. So I wouldn’t suggest that atheists are in anyway immune from peculiar beliefs, or even dogmatically held ones. Sometimes we cannot see the mote in our own eyes :)

  29. lofgren says

    Nevertheless I was talking about generalities. I concur there are many atheists who are not opposed to dogma, but I think as a generalisation it still holds. Even if they believe strange things, and do so dogmatically – they tend to, upon being asked, have a negative opinion of dogmatic views.

    I suspect that, when asked, everybody would claim they are opposed to dogmatic views, the same way everybody claims to be a skeptic, and everybody claims they are rational, etc.

    I think that, in general, the atheist community who frequents FreeThoughtBlogs and ScienceBlogs before it tend to be skeptics and rationalists, and many of them humanists. They therefore have a tendency to assume that other atheists are like them. But in my experience there are a lot of atheists who simply go about quietly lacking religion. The do not believe in any god, but they don’t participate in a community of fellow atheists, they don’t oppose religion in all its forms like some of us do, and they don’t critically examine their other irrational beliefs (to the extent that anybody can do so), nor do they value critical assessment of beliefs very highly. These people are allies of the “new” atheist community in many regards, such as opposing state enforcement of religion, or opposing religiously motivated laws such as infringement of reproductive rights. They are not always allies of science advocates in other regards, such as advocacy for safe vaccines, or genetic modification, or LGBT or women’s rights.

    Of course it is true that atheists will say they are opposed to dogmatic beliefs that lack evidence. Everybody knows on an intellectual level that this is a bad thing. The questions is how highly you value critical examination of beliefs to ensure that they are in accordance with evidence, and whether your behavior demonstrates that value. I believe (absent evidence, HAHA!) that there is probably about as much variation in that regard amongst atheists as there is amongst the general population.

  30. Kiwi Sauce says

    Infophile @2

    There is apparently some non-foreigner racism in Japan against the Burakumin. There are over 57000 hits in Google for “burakumin racism” but tl;dr for whether there are any associated statistics for capital punishment.

  31. Pierce R. Butler says

    Only in America is their [sic] such controversy over gay rights.

    (ahem!) xUSSR. PRC. Ug&a. Etc.

  32. dingojack says

    Brandon (#18) – Coffee consumption per capia per year (2008):
    27. USA 4.2 Kg
    41. Japan 3.3 Kg

    As opposed to those champions of ‘killing people to show people that killing people is wrong’:
    1. Finland 12.0 Kg
    2. Norway 9.9 Kg
    3. Iceland 9.0 Kg (2006)
    4. Denmark 8.7 Kg
    5. the Netherlands 8.4 Kg
    6. Sweden 8.2 Kg

    (11. Canada 6.5 Kg
    15. Italy 5.9 Kg
    36. New Zealand 3.6 Kg
    45. Australia 3.0 Kg
    47. United Kingdom 2.7 Kg)
    :) – Dingo
    —-
    ‘Give me 1,3,7Trimethylpurine 2,6dione, or give me death!’

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply