EU is becoming anti-christian in politics

[Ned]

In the US, Kerry has also said that Catholics cannot be appointed to the Federal judiciary. Now, ARAIK, that is blatant religious discrimination.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
Bunch of cells with no brain and nerve system, subsisting with someone's body and dependant on it for survival != a person.

Great. Why are you trying to convince me? I don't agree with their position. It doesn't mean I think it should be suppressed or disallowed.

As for black persons, I don't want to engage in a debate about universals. The easy answer could still be that whiteness can't conceiveably be a good criteria for 'personhood'.

Of course it can. In fact, it was!

[Dinner]

Originally posted by MikeH
Europe's less racist than the US.

I doubt that very, very much. My friends and I didn't get served in a restaurant in Germany because one of my friends was black. That is unheard of in California but the Germans all seemed ok about it. They also had "German only" night clubs where even white foreigners couldn't go.

From my experience Europe is more overt about it.

[Fake Boris]

Kucidude, the reason of my intervention was to show that the rationale behind their ideology was deeply religious, and thus contradict your point that it had nothing to do with the separation of Church and State.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Oerdin


I doubt that very, very much. My friends and I didn't get served in a restaurant in Germany because one of my friends was black. That is unheard of in California but the Germans all seemed ok about it. They also had "German only" night clubs where even white foreigners couldn't go.

From my experience Europe is far more racist and they're more overt about it.

True. But Canada is still the less racist country in the world.

[Ben Kenobi]

Not so, Deists are practically atheists. Or as far as you could get to be an atheist in those days.

Deists still affirm a transcendent morality, even as they reject the supernatural influence of God on the world.

So they are a far cry from the combination of atheism and relativism infused by the world today.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
Kucidude, the reason of my intervention was to show that the rationale behind their ideology was deeply religious, and thus contradict your point that it had nothing to do with the separation of Church and State.

The rationale behind your ideology is effectively religious, too. Humanism.

[Ben Kenobi]

And Ireland, as a memberstate, has to respect EU law that allows free movement of European citizens across memberstates. England allows abortions. Irish citizens have full legal rights under EU law to go to England. If that's for abortions, that's neither here nor there by the eyes of the EU. European law overrides memberstate law.

True, but when the EU funds floating abortion clinics, and helps to pay the costs for Irish women to seek abortions in the UK, then this could be easily construed as actively undermining the Irish legislature.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


The rationale behind your ideology is effectively religious, too. Humanism.

Back up your claims.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
Back up your claims.

Why should morals based on religion be forbidden, but morals of "atheists" be allowed? Your morals have exactly as much evidence for them as the Christians' do.

[Kuciwalker]

And what evidence do you have that a black person counts as a person but a fetus doesn't?

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


Why should morals based on religion be forbidden, but morals of "atheists" be allowed? Your morals have exactly as much evidence for them as the Christians' do.

No, we're talking about separation of Church and State. How would the state supporting a clearly religious ideology not violate this principle?

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
And what evidence do you have that a black person counts as a person but a fetus doesn't?

Again, no debate about universals here. From a common sense perspective, just like 99.9% of people can know what is a dog, a cat, a tree.

BTW, my beliefs may be unproven, but they're definitely more rational than those of religious people, as are probably yours.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
No, we're talking about separation of Church and State. How would the state supporting a clearly religious ideology not violate this principle?

It's not a clearly religious ideology. No one is having a religion forced on them (i.e., they aren't being prevented from sinning), they're being prevented from causing harm to others.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
Again, no debate about universals here. From a common sense perspective, just like 99.9% of people can know what is a dog, a cat, a tree.

"Common sense"?

Common sense used to say blacks weren't people, they were just fit to be slaves - I mean, they're so primitive and everything.

BTW, my beliefs may be unproven, but they're definitely more rational than those of religious people, as are probably yours.

How can you show them to be "rational" if they're unproven and dogmatic?