The Religious Left? (aka Achilles' Triumph)

[Totenkopf]

Do not theocracies claim to be making laws, in the name of God/gods, aimed at controlling behaviors? "Don't do this. Why? B/c it's bad and can lead to other problems." Perhaps we can solve the prison crisis in this country by teaching felons how to avoid getting caught. That's the same basic approach used to sex in secular thinking. I mean, they're going to do it anyway, right? So, let's decriminalize/remove the stigma from certain things so that the people engaging in these behaviors are less traumatized or at least don't suffer too egregiously from their arguably bad decisions. We say we want to curb pregnancies and stds, but then proceed to give children (at increasingly younger ages) the knowledge to engage in certain activities and a sort of *wink, wink, nudge, nudge* message to confuse them. It's bad, but it feels soooo good, so why don't you take these prophylactic items and try to mitigate any problems that could pop up. Then you wonder why kids are experimenting at younger and younger ages in apparently increasing numbers, nevermind that they might not use their new found "knowledge" in the heat of passion (or as in the young homosexual community, disregard "safe sex" techniques altogether) or a drunken/drug induced stupor. I agree with Prime that it's not simply enough to go "I told them don't do it, problem solved" (life should be so simple ). But mixed messages are no less inefficient at changing behaviors.

 

It's no less true after HIV, either, as Corinthian pointed out. Given that your statistics are global and not merely only the US, so what? By which I mean, more people die from malaria and other self inflicted wounds (heart disease,etc). Hardly a crisis. The AIDS scare in America (like the stats on homeless, uinsured, abortions, global warming) is based on tissues of lies and distortions aimed at getting a certain policy in place to benefit its proponents. When these groups are "outed" on their "disinfo" campaigns, they fall back on arguing that their motives are/were "pure" or that you're quibbling over numbers and attempt to demonize their critics.

 

As to the Bible, isn't that a charge that's been laid for time immemorial? Are you asserting the Bible is free of ANY contradictions?

 

Actually, I didn't say such an amendment does nothing. It would actually serve to back up existing law at the state level. Just another buttress in the legal infrastructure. What it wouldn't do is make anything significantly (at all?) more intrusive than the framework already in

place.

[mimartin]

The AIDS scare in America (like the stats on homeless, uinsured, abortions, global warming) is based on tissues of lies and distortions aimed at getting a certain policy in place to benefit its proponents. When these groups are "outed" on their "disinfo" campaigns, they fall back on arguing that their motives are/were "pure" or that you're quibbling over numbers and attempt to demonize their critics.

I will be sure to tell my best friend since 6th grade that his father death was a lie and has been distorted. A good man who raised three wonderful children that grew into well adjusted members of society. He was married to the same woman for thirty five years and I would stake my life on that he never cheated in any way on her. It took forever for them to figure out that he had AIDS because his lifestyle made that impossible. However, he did die of that disease, but I will tell the family that is not the case and they can get rid of the stigma associated with a HIV death in their family.

 

America as of 2005 – 550,394 death contributed to HIV.

Number of Americans diagnosed with HIV (2005) – 988,376

 

I guess those number are not that big unless one of them is someone you care about.

 

@mimartin--I believe there is no sanity of marriage. Just ask Jimbo.

LOL Thanks, I needed that laugh today.

[SilentScope001]

Then why pass an amendment to the Constitution that does nothing? Sounds like a complete waste of time to me. Doesn’t the Government have more important issues to tackle than something that really is a state issue?

 

The government only does what the people want. If the people want the government to interfere in choosing favorite colors, man, that what the government should do should.

 

Anyway, it is really the pro-gay marriage folks who need an amendment allowing for gay marriage. Without such an amendment, all states will just prohibit it. This entire issue is really about "tax credits" and "feel-good backing from the state", nothing more, nothing less. Honestly, I would prefer the government abolish marriage entirely and not give these tax breaks, but I know that would make some people rather upset.

[Totenkopf]

@mimartin--one death is tragic, a million a statistic. While I appreciate that these things can be emotional, that doesn't change the facts. The big problem is we were threatened with a looming crisis of seeming immeasuable magnitude almost 30 years ago. It never panned out like they portrayed it. Luck or manipulation? The fact that someone may contract the disease from other than the usual vectors (promiscuity and iv drug use), while tragic, doesn't elevate the problem to crisis proportions (except, naturally, at the individual level). I'm not saiying HIV is imaginary, merely that the reported scope of the problem was exagerated for purposes of social policy making. Much like with the current "global warming/climate change" scare. Sorry for your friend's loss. Btw, did they ever conclude how he might have gotten it? Tainted blood, at a dentist's office, hospital, etc..?

 

@silentscope--why not just ban the tax breaks period? I've heard of the marriage penalty, but what's the marriage tax break?

[SilentScope001]

@silentscope--why not just ban the tax breaks period? I've heard of the marriage penalty, but what's the marriage tax break?

 

This article explains the benieft of marriage. There are also discussions about creating an actual tax break for marriage, in order to encourage them. The previous article only talks about how society rewards marriage.

 

Great Britian also has a tax break for married couples too.

 

(The opposition to marriage stems from an argument that the state shouldn't promote anything religious, and since marriage is a religious insitution and the state is promoting marriage, the state is promoting religion, which may be seen as against the 1st Amendment (Congress shouldn't promote or go against any religious tradition). Therefore, the state should ban marriage. That's how I see it, and I do accept that sort of belief. Personally, I'd be fine with just getting rid of the tax breaks myself, but the political fallout would be too high.

 

It might be (a bit) easier to get rid of marriage entirely, but of course, the movement to ban marriage isn't too serious to threaten moral character.)

[mimartin]

Btw, did they ever conclude how he might have gotten it? Tainted blood, at a dentist's office, hospital, etc..?

It was tainted blood, it happened back when the government was fighting so hard to prevent blood from being tested because it would bankrupt the blood banks. It was also during a time I was extremely judgmental of alternative lifestyles as I wrote a report in high school government class that we should ship all homosexuals to some island to prevent the spread of whatever they called it at that time, GRID I believe. However, we did not discovery he was ill or had Aids until I was in college and both his sons were my roommates in Austin. That is when I came to regret many of my views.

 

See what I stated above. It's not my religious beliefs, it's science. And logic. And just a little bit of "Thou Shalt Not Murder".[/Quote] If pain is the determining factor and by this logic a cow can feel pain. Am I a participant in murder because I ate a hamburger tonight? Brain function would be a more persuasive argument to when life begins in my opinion. As a religious person when the soul enters the body would as be a determining factor for me.

Does anyone understand something called "adoption"?

[/Quote]Yes, I do and I admire anyone that adopts a child, but not all children even get a chance at adoption.

 

Got to admire the Left. They're just so understanding about accepting anyone and everyone.[/sarcasm][/Quote]You also have to admire the Right, they get so far by just sprouting rhetoric that only divides the country. The same politician preaching “family values” leaves his wife while she is undergoing cancer treatments for his mistress, but Bill Clinton is the bad guy. Another talks about “family values” yet invest in a porn movie. The right is pretty accepting too, but only to those on the right.

 

Unfortunately, sex ed or not, people still do what they want.

Agreed, but sex education may save lives by your definition by preventing unwanted pregnancies.

[Totenkopf]

As a religious person when the soul enters the body would as be a determining factor for me.

 

Fair enough. Now, how exactly do you determine that point? Many believe that that moment is conception.

 

You also have to admire the Right, they get so far by just sprouting rhetoric that only divides the country. The same politician preaching “family values” leaves his wife while she is undergoing cancer treatments for his mistress, but Bill Clinton is the bad guy. Another talks about “family values” yet invest in a porn movie. The right is pretty accepting too, but only to those on the right.

 

I'm guessing this kind of scrutiny is why many people don't like to be held up as role models. The difference between Bubba and Gingrich(?) is that one broke the law and abused his office, the other just acted like a callous jackass. I don find it ironic that someone as "smart" as Clinton couldn't have crafted a more believable story. I guess the blood really does leave the brain in situations like that.

 

Agreed, but sex education may save lives by your definition by preventing unwanted pregnancies.

 

So, by that logic, telling someone to abstain would be even more invaluable b/c an ounce of prevention is worth more than a ton of cure.

[Rogue Nine]

I have split the abortion discussion into a new thread here. Please keep the discussion in this thread on track (whatever it was and wherever it was going).