I'm writing this article in response to a recent article titled, Comparing Least Religious Countries With Most Religious - Do We Need Religion to Thrive as a Society?  The article purports to prove that the less religion, the "better" the country, as well as the more religion, the "worse" the country.  The author's conclusion is that a society does not need to be religious to be moral or to thrive.  I might mention here that the original argument was not that religion was required, but that religion was actually a hinderance, which I would suggest is a somewhat disingenuous juxtaposition in itself.  His statistics also, in my view, do not take a number of other factors into account, not the least of which is of which religion are we speaking, which shows a certain bias by suggesting that "all religions are alike".  It also does not take into account whether the particular society continues to coast on past religious instruction which, in effect, continues to provide the foundation for its system of morality.

In any event, and I ask that you read this entire article prior to coming to any conclusions regarding my intent in writing it, statistics were presented that the author claimed proved his case.  The question to be discussed here is NOT which claims are true, but whether the statistics provided in either article should be deemed conclusive proof for either assertion.

The assertion in this article, as reflected in the title, is that, on balance, "White" countries, by virtue of color alone, are better than less White countries.  Whether or not one wishes to argue that case is irrelevent in that, once again, that question is NOT the subject of this article.  I provide the link to the list which is rather interesting on its own, regardless of the purpose of this article.  http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/08/15/interactive-infographic-of-the-worlds-best-countries.html

The top 10 counties are all "White" countries with the exception of Japan.

None of the bottom 10 countries are primarily White, nor have they ever been.

Conclusion?  The color of one's skin is a key determinent in the quality of the country.

The point to this article?  Neither article has proved its thesis.