Let's talk POLITICS ( NO FIGHTS)

[Guest]

I got snowed him at my sister's house, so I just breezed over everything here.

 

As far as teaching creationism/the theory of evolution, I think they should teach both. I don't care if it's a public school or not, I'd hate to see people misinformed about other peoples' viewpoints. I think even people such as myself that don't believe in evolution should still be taught it, and that people who don't believe in creationism should still have some basic knowledge on it.

[soon-to-bemrs.penniman]

Now that I've started to flesh out my thoughts I've realised that no way can I address all of those issues in one post (the 1000 character limit would stop me for one ). So I'll break it down over several posts.

 

The first post will be on people's perceptions of Islam.

 

 

This may just be a matter of language/translation on your part, but I'll make the point anyway that there is a distinction between RELIGION and CULTURE.

 

 

Let's take a brief look at Islamic History. When Europe was in the Dark Ages, the religion of Islam gave women in the Islamic Empire the right to inherit, own property, own businesses and work, concepts that did not exist anywhere else in the world at the time. In fact, the Koran itself says that in God's/Allah's (Allah is merely the Arabic word for "God", it's not a different god or something) eyes in the end all human beings are equal irrespective of sex, race, social status, age, etc. and that the only thing that differentiates between them is their deeds i.e. their actions and their choices.

 

I think that you are not talking about the religion of Islam, Babz, you are talking about cultures that have distorted the religion to serve their own selfish purposes.

 

 

Again, you are talking about CULTURE not RELIGION.

 

The religion of Islam doesn't say "cross a street in a very non logical place" so you cannot say that "Muslims think that they can cross a street in a very non logical place". Islam doesn't say "don't learn Dutch" so the fact that those people who don't want to learn Dutch are Muslims is coincidental. Islam is not what motivated those behaviours, the two are unrelated. That perhaps has to do with their family upbringing and culture NOT their religion.

 

 

What I'm going to say isn't about Creationism itself, it's about your implication that the Christian and Islamic views of Creation are different, which I feel the need to correct. The Christian and Islamic views on the matter, in fact, are exactly the same. Why is that? It's because Muslims believe that Islam is the continuation of ONE religion (what we separate into Judaism, Christianity and Islam), the worship of "The One God" i.e. The All-Seeing, All-Hearing, All-Knowing Creator of the Universe. In Islam, Moses and Jesus are respected as Prophets of God ("The One God", the same God) just like Muhammad is, and many of the stories in the Torah and Bible are retold in the Koran. These three faiths have far more in common than many people know (or would otherwise like to admit).

 

 

I completely agree. In my daily life I see far too many people generalise and fear what they don't understand (i.e. Islam or the Middle East) yet don't seek to educate themselves on it. Even those who think that they know only know what a biased mass-media out for a polarising story and fear-mongering politicians have shown them.

 

I personally think that the best way to know something is to speak to someone who has lived it. Talk to a classmate whose family everyday fears for their lives in Iraq. Talk to a friend who has been spat on in the street because she wears a headscarf which she views as an external expression and symbol of her personal bond/relationship with God. Talk to someone who was pushed off a public bus and told 'go back to where you came from' when they were born and had lived their entire lives in that very same country. These are all people that I have met in my life. If you haven't met people like them, then believe me when I say that they EXIST and they're the ones who know the REAL DEAL, what it's really like.

 

That's all that ignorance and fear of what we don't understand leads to: misplaced blame and persecution of the blameless.

 

 

Please, if this thread does anything I hope that it will make you go out and seek to educate yourself on topics that you're not knowledgeable about. Or at least accept that it's possible that you've only seen the side of the story, the side that the media and politicians want you to see. I concede that there is no single person that is unbiased, that's why we need to actively seek ALL sides of the story and not just one.

 

I wish i could write out my thoughts as well as you:blink:

 

i don't think there's one point you've made that i don't agree with:thumb_yello:

 

it's interesting that you brought up the differences between religion and culture

i'm sure you don't care( ) but,

in class we were learning about Christianity, Judaism, and Islam in the 500s and we made a venn diagram of similarities and differences, and ( surprise surprise)most of the difference were culturally based.

[artsyfartsy17]

I just read this entire thread. *whew*

 

Anything I could possibly think to say has already been said. I feel as though I'm too late to say anything of consequence.

[lovempls]

What I'm going to say isn't about Creationism itself, it's about your implication that the Christian and Islamic views of Creation are different, which I feel the need to correct. The Christian and Islamic views on the matter, in fact, are exactly the same. Why is that? It's because Muslims believe that Islam is the continuation of ONE religion (what we separate into Judaism, Christianity and Islam), the worship of "The One God" i.e. The All-Seeing, All-Hearing, All-Knowing Creator of the Universe. In Islam, Moses and Jesus are respected as Prophets of God ("The One God", the same God) just like Muhammad is, and many of the stories in the Torah and Bible are retold in the Koran. These three faiths have far more in common than many people know (or would otherwise like to admit).

 

That was my typing mistake. I obviously know that they have the same views on the matter. When I typed what I said at the time I was just grasping at names of religions to prove a point - a point that really has nothing to do with this . Trust me, I've gone to nothing but Catholic schools my entire life. That's a lot of religion classes to sit through. I know all about the development of these religions from the different sons of Abraham, the view of Jesus and Moses as prophets, the same stories in the bible and the koran, and everything. I completely know the similarities.

 

Just thought I'd clarify that about myself

[Scut Monkey]

I realise that my promised post is now several days late. But I've been very busy with the new year, so maybe until I have more time and when everyone else also gets back anyway.

 

I wish i could write out my thoughts as well as you

 

i don't think there's one point you've made that i don't agree with:thumb_yello:

 

it's interesting that you brought up the differences between religion and culture

i'm sure you don't care( ) but,

in class we were learning about Christianity, Judaism, and Islam in the 500s and we made a venn diagram of similarities and differences, and ( surprise surprise)most of the difference were culturally based.

Thank you.

 

I do care (in both the general and MFC sense ). Interesting point.

 

Just thought I'd clarify that about myself

Sorry if I misunderstood you. It was a point I would have raised anyway, though.

[Guest]

That was my typing mistake. I obviously know that they have the same views on the matter. When I typed what I said at the time I was just grasping at names of religions to prove a point - a point that really has nothing to do with this . Trust me, I've gone to nothing but Catholic schools my entire life. That's a lot of religion classes to sit through. I know all about the development of these religions from the different sons of Abraham, the view of Jesus and Moses as prophets, the same stories in the bible and the koran, and everything. I completely know the similarities.

 

Just thought I'd clarify that about myself

 

I don't really have anything to add onto the conversation at hand, but I would like to say:

 

ROFL at your avatar!

"I'm sure he'd kick an ass or two, that's what Brian Boitano'd do.":mf_rosetinted:

[lovempls]

I don't really have anything to add onto the conversation at hand, but I would like to say:

 

ROFL at your avatar!

"I'm sure he'd kick an ass or two, that's what Brian Boitano'd do.":mf_rosetinted:

 

My favorite part is when he built the pyramids and beat up Kublai Khan. :roftl:

 

And your avatar is pretty amazing too

[Guest]

My favorite part is when he built the pyramids and beat up Kublai Khan. :roftl:

 

And your avatar is pretty amazing too

 

Oh, thanks. *blush*

 

Yea, I never saw that episode of South Park, but I love that song. And I saw Ross the Intern go to the Olympics and run into Brian Boitano, and he sang that.

[lovempls]

Oh, thanks. *blush*

 

Yea, I never saw that episode of South Park, but I love that song. And I saw Ross the Intern go to the Olympics and run into Brian Boitano, and he sang that.

 

It's not from an episode, it's from the SP movie, but it's all good That movie is amazing. And so is Ross.

[Guest]

It's not from an episode, it's from the SP movie, but it's all good That movie is amazing. And so is Ross.

 

I should rephrase that as "I haven't watched South Park since I was about 7"

 

But yes, Ross is amazing.

[kk448]

I should rephrase that as "I haven't watched South Park since I was about 7"

 

But yes, Ross is amazing.

 

*Interrupts conversation.*

 

I love Ross.

 

Didn't I say I was done with this thread?

[Guest]

*Interrupts conversation.*

 

I love Ross.

 

Didn't I say I was done with this thread?

 

Yes you did. Shall we continue this in the Hollis & Sarie thread?

[kk448]

Yes you did. Shall we continue this in the Hollis & Sarie thread?

 

Yes, of course.

[Buni_Suit_Classix]

aw, see i missed the thread, bye thread!

[soangel]

Okay, I was away when this thread was started so forgive me for dragging up the old abortion debate again, but I just want to give my opinion (I studied ethics and I always find this fascinating). I"m not trrying to start arguments, I just want to present my point of view, and I am not criticising anyone elses view.

 

For the record, I am pro choice, but that does not mean I am pro choice in every instance. The world isn't black and white, and neither is this deabte.

 

Abortion, in my opinion, is a last resort, and is never an easy decision. It is often emotionally damaging to the woman, and her family in some cases. Before getting an abortion, a woman would make a number of considerations (imo)

 

Like, will the father support her? (Because, he helped make the child after all, so why should the woman be forced to raise a child because she has to carry it, while he can easily walk away). Or will her family support her? Its much easier to bring a child into the world if your not going to be kicked out of home for what is most likely an accident.

 

Another consideration is whether the woman is emotionally ready to have a child. If a woman feels she is unable to raise a child, and unable to give said child a satisfactory life, then should she be forced to keep it?

 

If the woman feels she is unable to bring the child into a world, then adoption is an option. However it isn't as easy as it is made out to be. The woman is carrying this child in her for 9 months (or so), and in that time forming an emotional attachment. She is carrying this child, and then having to give it up. The child will always be out there, somewhere in the world. Will iit have a good life? Will it be better off? How can the woman know this? Will it turn up on day, asking her that one question she may not be able to answer.... why?

Is it easier to have a child and give them up, or to not have a child at all? And what happens if you change your mind?

 

And then theres the circumstances in which the woman/girl got pregnant. As has been stated, just because a woman is able to have sex, doesn't mean she is ready to have a child. If a woman uses protection and still gets pregnant, should she have to bear the burden? What about the case of rape? Should she have to give birth to the child of a man who violated and abused her?

 

If the woman feels she is unable to raise or adopt the child, then abortion should be an option. Not just for the woman, but for the child.

 

How would a child feel, knowing that its mother resents it, or never wanted it? How would it feel knowing its mother gave up her dreams to raise the child because she was forced to, because she didn't have that option? Or in the case of the sexually promiscious girl, who many think should live with her 'punishment'. how would a child feel being that punishment?

In the case of rape, how would a child feel knowing its father raped its mother? Would it be fair to bring a child into the world that might be resented for a life long reminder of something its father did (yes the mother will remember anyway, but a child does not have to suffer because of that.) A woman might be able to love that child regardless, but at the same time they might not.

 

 

And what about in the case where the woman can not carry the child to term without risk to herself? Should she sacrifice herself for her child? Or if the child was going to have terrible health issues? Would it be better to abort a child who might otherwise only live a painfilled short life? While the child may still have joy in their life, it also has to be asked, is it fair to place such a burden on the parents, by asking them to bring a child into the world only to watch them suffer?

 

While I may personally not ever exercise my choice to have an abortion, I still feel there should be a choice, for the sake of the mother and the child. If the choice is not there, then the woman will just use another option, one that could cause her great harm and potentially kill her. To use the extrene case, would you rather your mother/sister/child/friend to get an abortion they feel they need/want to have, and that they feel is the last resort, with a professional, or would you rather they turn to a home clinic in someones backyard with a coathanger? Because whether its legal or not, women will still get abortions.

 

 

And just to leave, here is an analogy (it applies mostly to rape). It is by no means a fool proof example, but it raises food for thought. (Its by Judith Jarvis Thompson, who has fascinating stuff to say on the subject)

 

You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist's circulatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. [if he is unplugged from you now, he will die; but] in nine months he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you.[4]

 

So should you stay attached to this man, giving him use of your body for 9 months? Or do you have the right to unplug yourself, knowing that as a side effect he will die.

 

And to compare it to accidental pregnancies, suppose you weren't kidnapped. Suppose you went to the hospital and merely pressed the wrong button on the lift, exiting on a floor where the music society had been told the next person through has volunteered through their actions to go through with it.

Could you still unplug yourself and allow him to die? Would you give up your life for 9 months for this person?

 

Just remember, in the case of a child, you're not just giving up 9 months, you're giving up many years.

 

Anyways, thats my opinion. If I insulted someone, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to.

 

And I'm sorry for writing an essay on the topic (just about) but I just wanted to share my opinion.

 

 

I'm all for a new topic btw

[Scut Monkey]

I think you raised some valid and interesting points, Soy, especially about the consequences of certain choices which weren't previously considered here.

 

But, yeah, it's a good time for a new topic.

 

But now I'm busy with helping update the FAQ's so I might let everyone start a discussion before I state my opinions. If I remember correctly a few interesting issues worthy of discussion were raised before: female politicians, gay rights, and war.

[nico_collard]

not very, but most of the time, i mean come on, the criminals killed are the right ones! and yes, it is unfair to the innocent ones, but there are a lot of faults in th world, and if someone gets falsly accused and is killed, they are probably better off dead than to have to live with depression after they get out!

 

Who says we have the right to kill someone who killed somone else?

 

If we did that, then we are just as bad as the murderers.. (imo)

 

Adoption is always the better alternative in my eyes.

 

I hope I don't come across as a bitch when I say this...

 

Have you ever had to give up a child for adoption? Do you honestly know wat it's like to go through that?

 

I'll tell you a story... and I'm sure the subject of the story wouldn't mind that I'm doing so...

 

At the age of 19, mysister was in a long trm relationship. She fell pregnant. Her boyfriend told her to have an abortion, and at one stage, they broke up. She made a conscious decision that she would carry the baby to term and put it up for adoption, without telling anyone else.

 

She did that, and a week before she was due, my parents found out. They decided that it was best to put th baby up for adoptio and no one would know. When she gave birth, she spoke to the Deaprtment of Community Services, who sorted out a foster family for the baby to stay with. My parents then told us and swore us to secrecy (and let me point out that it was very difficult t be tld to keep such a secret at 16 - I am very close to my sister and I felt like was giving up a part of myself). They ended up changing their minds and brought the baby home.

 

Because my sister was livin 1 1/2 hours from home and doing a hairdressing apprenticeship, my parents made the decision t look afte the baby during the week and when my sister came home, sh would look afte her.

 

Oky... there is a moral to the story. There is no black and white in the adoption/abortion debate. There are many choices (adoption, abortion, foster family until you're ready to look after a child, parents/family to help out, etc).

 

And I also agree with Kelzy,you can't truly know what you ould do in such a situation unless you're faced with it.

 

But, if I had to box myself.. I would say I agree with aspects of pro choice and pro life. I agree that abortion is wrong, but at the same time I think it could be excused if the baby has some sort of disease that would cause it a lot of pain or it wouldn't survive outside the womb. Or if a woman was raped.

 

Exactly. Just for an example, I was watching a show on Autism the other day. They were studying the case of a boy who couldn't talk, communicate, or have any control whatsoever over his face, limbs, etc. But they gave him some kind of machine, and he could type letters and words. He understood everything going on around him, and was intelligent for his age, but he couldn't communicate. Don't you think maybe it's the same way with fetuses? Obviously they can't communicate, but they can still feel pain. Just because you don't hear them crying out doesn't mean it doesn't hurt. I forget what age pain sensitivity developes.

 

Children with autism are generally above average intelligence.. *hides cause uni education is coming out*

 

I've been in Catholic schooling all my life...last year we learned about all of the methods...They are real and they are effective.

 

So?

 

So did I. I went through 13 years of religion, and thn did two years of it at university.

 

Just because I did all that, doesn't mean I agree with everything the Catholic church says or tries to enforce.

 

I have absolutely nothing else to add and can't even remember why you posted that, but I just wanted to point that out.

 

Why I'm pro-choice:

• Because if there are no legal methods, some women WILL seek out dodgy, illegal methods
   
  
• Because a child born to a mother who's forced to have the child "to pay for her mistakes" is HIGHLY unlikely to have a good upbringing
   
  
• Because there are so many grey areas - rape, a severely disabled child, etc - that sweeping legislation could not, IMHO, possible cover all bases.
  

 

That said, I think abortion should be an absolute last resort, and the thought of a young women obtaining an abortion as easily as she goes to the market for some apples is horrifying.

 

Not getting into the situation in the first place is paramount. Birth control education needs to be repeated over and over and over. And, in an ideal world, familes would support their young daughters unexpected pregnancies and help them consider other options.

 

Unfortunately, the world isn't ideal.

 

I totally agree LM...

 

Wow. Just read through all 35 pages of this thread that was ostensibly about politics but which became an abortion thread... would have finished sooner, but MIKA was on the MTV Europe Awards which was FINALLY shown on US tv!

 

Anyhoo...

 

Alright... so I deleted most of your post... but I agree...

 

You're so wise Deb.. *bows down to Deb*

 

And right about the politics bit... abortion is more a moral/ethical issue rather than a political issue...

 

'COLORED' IS NOT SPELLED WITH A 'U'.

*yanks Mana's hair out*

 

Ummm... you're wrong. That's the correct spelling of the word. Canadians, along with the rest of the English speaking world (excepting Americans) use traditional English. Americans just had to be different.

 

It is in Canada! Along with honour and glamour. :lightsabre:

 

Sheesh. Americans might not all be right-wing religious zealots - but they certainly can't spell.

 

And what's up with "zee"? It's "zed" people!

 

Damn straight!

 

*high fives Mana*

 

I am not inventing cases at all.

I am a law student and therefore happen to have an extensive knowledge about cases and tend to slip them into conversation where they seem appropriate, in this case i was to see your opinion with regard to your previous comments about mental handicap.

I think that there is alot of stereotyping going on here (including some unfair terminology). Mental handicap can come in a variety of degrees so it isnt right to tar everyone with the same brush.

 

Ummm... handicap isn't the right term.. I believe that it's actually disabled.

 

In Wisconsin (whoo! my neighbor! ) recently, at the U of Madison I think, they discovered a way to change specialized cells - I think epithelial cells? but I could be wrong, don't quote me - back to stem cells. They haven't been able to convert those stem cells back into differentiated cells yet, however, this is a HUGE breakthrough. If we can use our own differentiated cells as stem cells, we can replace neurons (which is impossible for our body to do on its own) and things like that. Also, it replaces our need for embryonic stem cells. Just throwing it out there.

 

Yep... I read in a magazine that a lady had the special cells inserted into her heart and it helped it... (wow, I sound so smart! )

 

You can teach it, sure, but you should not do so in a science class. It would be best in a theology or philosophy class, or social sciences, something like that.

 

Especially since if you decide to teach it in a science class because it is "what's some people believe," you would have to teach the various other non-scientific beliefs other cultures have about creation as well, so as not to discriminate. (We did do this in my social studies class in 7th grade.)

 

--Jack

 

Exactly... Catholic high schools here teach evolutionist theory in Science, and in religion teach creationist theory... and allow students to belive what they like (I only know this because I went to a few catholic high schools)

 

I don't know about American schools, but in the primry schol syllabus for Human Society and Its Environment (ie Social Science), theachers are required to cover the main worl religions and beliefs of Indigeous people (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders). World religions are also covered in High School.

 

As far as teaching creationism/the theory of evolution, I think they should teach both. I don't care if it's a public school or not, I'd hate to see people misinformed about other peoples' viewpoints. I think even people such as myself that don't believe in evolution should still be taught it, and that people who don't believe in creationism should still have some basic knowledge on it.

 

I agree...

 

I know that here, even if Catholic and Independent Religious schools didn't want to teach it, they are required to teach it, otherwise they can be closed down.

[nico_collard]

I think you raised some valid and interesting points, Soy, especially about the consequences of certain choices which weren't previously considered here.

 

But, yeah, it's a good time for a new topic.

 

But now I'm busy with helping update the FAQ's so I might let everyone start a discussion before I state my opinions. If I remember correctly a few interesting issues worthy of discussion were raised before: female politicians, gay rights, and war.

I suggest female politicians...

[Kelzy]

I suggest female politicians...

 

*votes Teegs For President*

:dc: :pd:

 

I find it hard to swallow when people say Women should not run Countries. I find it Sexist and closed minded, and dare I say, downright screwed up in the head...

Where is the proof that Women can't run them as good or even better than the Men that run them now. Throughout History there have been many women of great influence in positions of power.

Let's name some...

[nico_collard]

Margaret Thatcher? Though I bet she had more balls than most male pollies arund at the same time...

[Kelzy]

Margaret Thatcher? Though I bet she had more balls than most male pollies arund at the same time...

 

geez.. Yes!!! even Marilyn Monroe was influential..

speaking of MM.. i'd like to submit Mary Magdalene.. one of the most influential women of all time (if you believe in the bible) *goes to compose some data on both MM's*

[nico_collard]

Oh yes... and if you believe... crap, can't remember the book!

 

The Da Vinci Code! That's it!

 

As I was saying... if you believe The Da Vinci Code, she also carried the child of Jesus...

[Kelzy]

Oh yes... and if you believe... crap, can't remember the book!

 

The Da Vinci Code! That's it!

 

As I was saying... if you believe The Da Vinci Code, she also carried the child of Jesus...

 

I read the book and watched the movie. The book was better.. Can't say I was sold on the idea but it certainly opened up my eyes on the possibility that there's more to the story than we've been told..

[Scut Monkey]

To me it's not a matter of that gender being equal in politics, I see it as a matter of that gender is irrelevant in politics. I know that it may sound like splitting hairs but the former recognises that there are two different genders and that they both affect political leader's role in a different way yet at the end the two genders are of equal worth, the latter considers gender as not being a factor at all in a political leader's role. I really do think what makes a good political leader is their personality and the circumstances that surround their career not what hormones circulate in their blood or whether their reproductive organs are on the inside or the outside. There's a double-standard: when we judge a male's suitability as a political leader we never take into consideration his gender yet when we judge a female's suitability as a political leader we take into consideration her gender. For now equality would be good, but eventually I hope for it to become irrelevant. Especially considering that trangendered people are underrepresented in politics; when gender becomes irrelevant they may find their rightful place.

 

Yet despite the double-standards and glass-ceilings that women currently face, plenty of women have taken the political helm. Whoever said that "the US is not ready for a female president" I have to question why? If the UK, Ireland, Germany, Israel, Pakistan, India, Chile, Argentina, the Phillipines, Finland, Sweden (as mommylovesmika pointed out) and New Zealand and others have all had female political leaders then why is the US behind the rest of the world?

 

Recently Australia had it it’s first technical female Prime Minister, the deputy Prime Minister filled in the position of Prime Minister while he was away overseas. But we have yet to popularly elect a female. It's only a matter of time, though.

 

If we're talking about "favourite" female political leaders, then I would have to mention the recently departed Benazir Bhutto. She was twice popularly-elected Prime Minister of Pakistan in the 80's and 90's and was embroiled in corruption allegations each time to which stepped down for. Last year she returned to Pakistan and on December 27th, two weeks before the 2008 general election where she was a leading opposition candidate, she was assassinated.

[nico_collard]

when we judge a female's suitability as a political leader we take into consideration her gender.

 

Or, in the cse of Julia Gillard... the fact that she has no children or her hairstyle...