Forget Nigeria, how do you account for the superior levels of trust in non-Christian societies such as those of Singapore and Japan, and their significantly lower levels of crime, when compared with what you call 'Christian' nations? Can the values that gave rise to these two societies be extracted and made to thrive independent of the dogma which supposedly gave rise to them? If so, wouldn't the dogma itself be rendered meaningless?
LOL, well that would depend on what the meaning of "dogma," is.
One person's values is another person's dogma, eh?
You've got what someone should do on one hand, and you've got why someone should do it on the other hand. So how can you take one of those away and leave the other one intact? Aren't they two sides of the same coin? Change one, you change the other - they're interdependent. Remove one... then upon what does the other stand?
savagesusie and others believe that the Christian doctrine is equivalent to the true belief in God that is necessary to uphold American principles. But the Founders also drew heavily upon the ancient Greeks and Romans. And plenty of Christians in Europe never got the freedom memo - to this day. As well, why not therefore make Christianity part of the American government, rather than the (at the time) outrageously liberal 1st Amendment?
As you point out, morality is strong in Singapore and Japan. Well, so too is it all over the world. For example, in India, both philosophically and in reality, morality is the very essence of religious thought. Much of India's problems come from communist economics, massive population and Muslim infiltration. But it was Hindus who would admit to even capital crimes when simply questioned by the British in the 1800s, even when they knew it would mean execution. The British marvelled at such an intense morality.
That's just an example, but the point is that morality is not a solely Christian doctrine or practice on this planet, and to claim such is insulting - in the extreme - to billions of non-Christian human beings. Nor, of course, do Christians or Catholics agree to be held en masse to the failings - even major ones - of morally fallen members or past actions of their own religions (while between themselves they hold the others as "not Christian" enough). So it works both ways.
I believe the root "need" is something most people - all around the world - would consider too simplistic. Nevertheless, I think it's missing almost everywhere, no matter what people claim to be. The Bible refers to God as "terrible" in certain places, and it always used to bother me. Now, not so much. Because I believe it is referring to what happens when a human being finally realizes that there really is a God beyond the reach of all the mental and emotional games and denial, who cannot be ignored any longer. That soul-recognition is "terrible" to the ego, because it is permanent. From then on, it cannot be escaped, not matter what religion one is.
And if it is lacking, no religion on earth will keep one moral, which is why there are frauds in every religion.
From that alone comes the idea that there is a way of life that must be lived that is truly moral - because at that point, one can truly hear the guidance of God, because one becomes desperate not to screw up. That's why murderous "religions" are false, because there is no humility in them. And humility is the direct result of realizing that there is no escape, for anyone, from God's law.
Which, (oh yeah, that's where I started), also includes economics - as well as everything else.
The mind set of Japan was mass slavery for centuries. Women were chattel. Samurai background was much like the Ancient Greeks—where pederasty was prevalent. Japan’s fixation on excretion was remarked on by Michael Savage when he was talking about knowing populations by the type of pornography they produce. Japan’s was totally anal and vile—similar to “gay” porn. Today, Japan has made child pornography legal. There is no “Christian Virtue” in that country. You think there is “trust” in Japan when it was massive fear at being “different”. They had mass conformity to ideals which were sick and unnatural—so irrational.
Singapore was colonized by Britain who did an excellent job on infrastructure and education where ever they went—unlike the French, etc. They brought Common Law (Christianity) with them in the early 1800’s and that helped and a parliamentary Republic. Generations have been raised with that structure so trust could develop.
Superior levels of Trust? Nope—Mass conformity has nothing to do with “trust” and everything to do with “fear”. Marxism creates no trust in anyone—just in the State. I am talking about trusting other human beings like in families—where my dad used to do business with a handshake. Since the 60’s, even people here no longer keep their vehicles and houses unlocked because the welfare state creates people of no virtue.