One-Issue Voters Make Me Sick

[Ben Kenobi]

So, Ben, are you in favor of laws that enforce a particular set of religious values then? Compared to laws that allow all non-harmful* religious values to be exercised? Naturally these values might not be christian. They could be budhist, hindu, pagan, or anything else.

-Drachasor

*We'll assume "harmful" means direct, physical harm to another (and potentially the self, whichever you prefer).

So you, are willing to enforce a particular set of values, when you believe that opposition to these values is harmful?

Why do you disagree with the enforcement of religious ideals, grounded in the same principle of the preventation of harms?

[Ben Kenobi]

Live your own life, believe what you want. But stay the hell out of MY life, Benny boy.

No one's forcing you to post here.

[David Floyd]

Given this choice opposed to a state religion of atheism, and rejection of God, it's pretty cut and dried for me.

What's wrong with a state that is officially atheist but does not prohibit or constrain any organized religion?

[Ben Kenobi]

because the embryos are theirs. they may not agree with me in that they are actual people. therefore, for me to force my beliefs upon them is also morally unconscionable.

Am I allowed to beat up my infant child, in the privacy of my own home because I believe her to be my property?

These children are not the property of their parents before their birth, any more so than they are after birth.

wrong. it's not choosing between one good and two evils, it's choosing between one pure good, one lesser good, and one evil.

So, why don't unloved children be given up to science so that we can one day cure cancer?

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by David Floyd
What's wrong with a state that is officially atheist but does not prohibit or constrain any organized religion?

Ben was saying that he believes such a thing is inherently harmful to all citizens. I think he was trying to say he is pro-'democratic' theocracy.

The difference between that and me is that I am pragmatic and care about results that can be seen and measured. Happiness and the like can be seen and measured, as can misery. From what I have seen more happiness and less misery are typical of societies that allow more religious and intellectual freedom, compared to those that don't.

-Drachasor

[Ben Kenobi]

What's wrong with a state that is officially atheist but does not prohibit or constrain any organized religion?

And what is wrong with a state that establishes Catholicism along the same principles?

The truth is, one cannot establish a religion without constraining other religions. It's the primary principle behind the establishment clause, to preclude religious persecution on these grounds.

[David Floyd]

These children are not the property of their parents before their birth, any more so than they are after birth.

Ah, but before birth, the fetus can't survive without the continued consent of the mother. That doesn't necessarily make it property, in the sense that my computer is my property, but it means that the mother retains some moral rights regarding her own body.

[Arrian]

What's wrong with a state that is officially atheist but does not prohibit or constrain any organized religion?

Preposterous! We cannot allow people to make their own choices about their beliefs! Heresy! BURN HIM!!

-Arrian

[Ben Kenobi]

The difference between that and me is that I am pragmatic and care about results that can be seen and measured. Happiness and the like can be seen and measured, as can misery. From what I have seen more happiness and less misery are typical of societies that allow more religious and intellectual freedom, compared to those that don't.

How do you empirically measure happiness?

[David Floyd]

And what is wrong with a state that establishes Catholicism along the same principles?

Nothing, so long as the state doesn't take policy dictations from the Pope/Church, and doesn't provide special exemptions for Catholic Churchs, etc., etc.

The truth is, one cannot establish a religion without constraining other religions.

That's sorta my point. Atheism isn't a religion. Catholicism is. Now, many people like to call atheism a religion, and that may be true for certain definitions in the case of certain rabid atheists, but in the sense I'm talking about, I simply mean the complete absence of religion from government.

[Arrian]

The truth is, one cannot establish a religion without constraining other religions.

EXACTLY. Which is why the state should have no religion.

The disconnect between us appears to be that you believe Atheism is a religion. I find this bizzare, since Atheism is simply the absense of a belief in God.

-Arrian

[Ben Kenobi]

Ah, but before birth, the fetus can't survive without the continued consent of the mother.

Frozen embryos can survive without the consent of their mother.

That doesn't necessarily make it property, in the sense that my computer is my property, but it means that the mother retains some moral rights regarding her own body.

True, but the children retain the same moral rights over their own body as the mother has over hers.

What sense does it make to say that these frozen embryos are merely part of their mother's body, when clearly they are distinct, and can, if implanted into another woman, continue to grow and develop.

[Ben Kenobi]

EXACTLY. Which is why the state should have no religion.

The disconnect between us appears to be that you believe Atheism is a religion. I find this bizzare, since Atheism is simply the absense of a belief in God.

Atheism is a religion, in that it cannot be proven along empirical grounds, and is based upon the dictations of conscience.

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
How do you empirically measure happiness?

While what makes someone happy might vary from person to person (and this can be found out, though it is harder), how satisfied someone is with their life, how much they enjoy it, other such factors can be fairly accurately judged by asking them to grade such factors on a 1-10 scale.

Unhappiness is much, much easier to measure. Depression and other mental illnesses, poverty, difficulty with affording basic needs, high levels of stress are all things that are much easier to spot.

More improvements to such measurements would come by understanding the brain better.

-Drachasor

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Atheism is a religion, in that it cannot be proven along empirical grounds, and is based upon the dictations of conscience.

That's technically "hard atheism" that is a faith-based belief; which is not religion.

If you don't like that, then let us say an agnostic government. How about that?

-Drachasor