No More Bin Laden

[eppie]

Our problem in the west is not with Islam it is with too old fashioned and traditional cultures.

Why do you assume that newer is better? The same rush to progress that wiped out indigenous people, and clear cut virgin forests, is still at play today only its in perhaps in poorly thought through changes in gene manipulation, chemical additives in food, or in production or use of materials.

OK, no I don't generally assume newer is better. But I assume liberal societies better than societies that consider women 2nd grade citizens for example.

I'm probably one of those people you'd lump in with the "bad" Islam. I've grown more conservative as I get aged, but it's more a conservatism in realizing what we're destroying and what we've lost. And, I'm thinking about culture, art, language, and peoples experiences. I value the process of life, and the possibilities that a life can accumulate and inform the present and future.

So not the normal accepted kind of American conservative, but more conservative in certain topics.......so that is exactly as I am.

In your accounting, it seems people are good as long as they are willing to adopt your moral compass.

My moral compass is not to hurt other people and lot other people decide for themselves what they want to do with their lives.......so yes.

Religion becomes a way to justify forcing people to comply with one particular world view, and this application of force is just as flawed as is the one in your more humanist, more atheistic culture.

Well no. If I am for euthanasia it doesn't mean I want to euthanize people, it means I want to give them the chance to choose this path if THEY want to.

So, what if... Allowing babies to be killed in the womb really is a murder? And, I'm not talking a religious dogma here, be it Islam, or Christianity. Our societies all prohibit the killing of innocents, and some even prohibit the killing of the extremely malevolent. Obviously, the baby is not much different a week before delivery, than a week after delivery. So, placement within the womb is not an indication of the legality to terminate. Then typically the debate devolves into which body functions must be operational, which is problematic because the two most usual integral parts, the beating heart, and the brain are formed very early. Often by the time a women realizes she is pregnant (5 - 6 weeks), the fetus has already formed into a human child. At this point, disposing of it merely due to the inconvenience seems to me a bit morally callous. The same argument (inconvenient or a waste of resources) could be made for many adults, whether they be mentally challenged, elderly, or just slackers.

If you seriously want to discuss this with me you should not use sentence like '1 week before birth' and ' disposing merely due to inconvenience'. Your poisoning the discussion with fake arguments.

The US is pretty split on many of these types of issues, but the "science" of the issue has very little to do to inform the debates. For the "traditionalists" the issue has more to do with giving one person the right to terminate the life of another person, or even in allowing a person to self terminate.

Yes because this person (the mother) really has fun 'terminating the life of another person (her unborn child). Again if you seriously want to discuss this point you should not write down these scandalous and insulting phrases. The only thing you show when writing these things is not being capable of empathy. I 'know' you and know this is not the fact so please stop writing these things.

They'd listen to the science of how the embryo develops, but at a larger level it is irrelevant to these issues. This is not merely a Christianity, or Islam thing. Taboo's exist in almost every culture on the planet regarding the taking of lives. Generally, in all these cultures, the moral side involves preserving life, and the dark side involves terminating life. Infanticide, and euthanasia are issues for a society to resolve, barring all religious dogma, since "living" is fundamental to participation. These are also groups within the society who have the least capability of protecting themselves from the tyranny of the majority. It's not much of a step from this, to relieving the inconvenient mentally infirm from their suffering existence (and saving us lots of wasted time and money).

Again, your opinion is troubled by the propaganda of fox news. Just like earlier written in this thread (meat or gnollguy I believe) people really think euthanasia is forced upon people which is so not true. And also the mother (parents) should have the right to choose what's right for her child. Everyone can see that the injustice done when aborting does not come close to the injustice of being an unwanted abused child.

Extending the issue of rights further, I ask, what gives you (whether it be a person or government) the right to tell me what to do?

Indeed nothing. And that is why I am for the right to euthanasia and abortion. And against religious nutjobs telling other people what to do.

Why should we care that some people want to have many spouses?

Because this is inequality. You agree with the fact that men have a god given power over women.

the yoke of government, whether it be exercised by Washington, Amsterdam, or Tehran.

The dutch government resides in the Hague.

More directly on the topic; I have no issue with Islam, or any religious groups as long as politically and as expressed in their laws they respect the rights of people who are not like them to have freedoms within the society (which may or may not be dominated by them).

I agree. Sadly there are very little examples of this being really true. Not even in Holland, Denmark or Sweden. Maybe in France.