NationStates Jolt Archive

Please state your religion (or absence of), your stance on abortion and whether you prefer the United States of America or Europe.

Example:

I am an atheist. I am pro-choice. I live in America and I like it better than Europe.

I am Catholic by tradition, pro-choice, I live in the US but would like to visit Europe.

...

...

...

...

...And I'm rather tired of all this "Europe VS USA" bullshit...

Things were so much better when we could put nationality behind us but NOOOOO!

Some WHO SHALL NOT BE NAMED continue to this day to be asshats. Certain Americans perpetuate the "ignorant of the world" stereotype, and certain Europeans love to lord so-called superiority over the US.

I'M GOING TO PLAY SOME FINAL FANTASY!

CALL ME IF I'M NEEDED!

-Bolol

PS: I'm...quite sorry...

Very well. I am atheist, patafarian, generalite, or however any of these 3 are called in your language. I am pro-choice, I live in Europe and find it to be much better than america. I find this thread to be incomplete without a poll and a good joke option.

I'm Christian, pro-life, pro-American, and unashamed.

I'm an American and I think that there is enough America vs. Europe crap going around. Perhaps the smarter of people are the ones who realized we both have our unique qualities that the other can't offer. In my travelling experiences, if we get past our governments, we actually make quite good friends, Americans and Europeans.

I'm ignostic, pro-death and I prefer Antarctica.

I'm ignostic, pro-death and I prefer Antarctica.

lol. you win the thread.

I generally don't have a religious preference , Abortion should only be used in life threatening situations , Definitely Europe.

I am a follower of Jesus (aka: Christian) pro-life and a proud American

Thread too broad. You must wish to start some kind of argument or something. Your questions aren't designed to elicit informative responses.

lol. you win the thread.

I wasn't joking? I am ignostic, I don't give a shit about the life of a fetus, whether or not it has a soul and is a sentient human, and I dislike America and Europe equally for different reasons, and think that Antarctica is highly prefferable, since it lacks any organized society to dick around about nonsense.

I hate any acknowledgment that religion isn't bullshit.

Pro-choice. A fetus isnt a life form, it's a bunch of under-developed cells.

European, America is a political dump. Nice countryside though :)

I wasn't joking? I am ignostic, I don't give a shit about the life of a fetus, whether or not it has a soul and is a sentient human, and I dislike America and Europe equally for different reasons, and think that Antarctica is highly prefferable, since it lacks any organized society to dick around about nonsense.Can we come live with you? - I'll cook :)

I'm an American and I think that there is enough America vs. Europe crap going around. Perhaps the smarter of people are the ones who realized we both have our unique qualities that the other can't offer. In my travelling experiences, if we get past our governments, we actually make quite good friends, Americans and Europeans.

People still don't realize, that at the basic level without the idiocy, all humans are the same regardless of where they are from. Plus most Americans originated in Europe anyway.. so why the bitching :\

I see a nice 6 pages of crap coming. I give it 10 mins before the question is lost under pointless arguements, scrap that petty insults.

No Religion / Agnostic...Pro-Choice...Canada

People still don't realize, that at the basic level without the idiocy, all humans are the same regardless of where they are from. Plus most Americans originated in Europe anyway.. so why the bitching :\
Well no, I don't think all humans are the same at all. I don't think Americans and Europeans are the same, but I've always gotten along quite well in person with every European I've met. The only people I havn't gotten along well with, even excluding politics, are Russians and Arabs. For Europeans and Americans, we like to get at each others throats alot, but once we get tired of bitching at each other, we get along quite well.

(I'm not talking about on internet debate sites, I'm talking about in real life.)

I'm ignostic, pro-death and I prefer Antarctica.

Unholy shit. I honestly didn't think anyone else knew ignosticism existed. Though, strictly, I'm a theological noncognitivist.

I am theologically noncognitivistic (ignostic), pro-death, and I consider national boundaries absurdly irrational. I have a strong dislike of 52% of American citizens - the 52% who believe the universe was created within the last 6,000 years.

Can we come live with you? - I'll cook :)

Unfortunately, we're hearing rumors of Russia attempting to claim the Antarctic (apparently, Putin's Ice Fetish has an underwater continental plate running through the whole world), and so we're moving under-permafrost for a while.

On the other hand... If you're willing to cook, we'll delay.

I see a nice 6 pages of crap coming. I give it 10 mins before the question is lost under pointless arguements, scrap that petty insults.

Alright, Mr. The-glass-is-shattered-on-the-floor-and-a-piece-of-it-just-got-lodged-in-my-foot... be more positive.
NSG could manage 12 pages of that in around 5 minutes.

Ignostic, pro-choice and I've never lived in either Europe or the US, but I've visited both places (well, only a small part of each really) and I prefer Europe (or at least Italy) to the US (or at least Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts).

Unholy shit. I honestly didn't think anyone else knew ignosticism existed. Though, strictly, I'm a theological noncognitivist.

I am theologically noncognitivistic (ignostic), pro-death, and I consider national boundaries absurdly irrational. I have a strong dislike of 52% of American citizens - the 52% who believe the universe was created within the last 6,000 years.
Woah, there are three of us here?!

Woah, there are three of us here?!

An unexpected, but not undesirable, coincidence.

An unexpected, but not undesirable, coincidence.
Well, I'd just never encountered anyone who would describe themselves as such before. In a thread a while back I mentioned that I was one and a couple of people assumed I'd misspelled agnostic.

I'm an unaffiliated liberal, at-times Christian, pro-choice and I think the US and Europe both have their own nice points, but I'm partial to the US because that's where nearly all of the people I care deeply about live.

Ignostic, pro-choice and I've never lived in either Europe or the US, but I've visited both places (well, only a small part of each really) and I prefer Europe (or at least Italy) to the US (or at least Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts).

What did you dislike about Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts?

Was it the congestion? If so...I can kinda understand.

Agnostic, pro-choice, pro-Europe.

Well, I'd just never encountered anyone who would describe themselves as such before. In a thread a while back I mentioned that I was one and a couple of people assumed I'd misspelled agnostic.

Well, ignosticism is a highly specialised and pretty inaccessible branch of agnosticism (or atheism, in my case). It's quite hard to explain - much more so than atheism or agnosticism - which is probably why there's less people identifying as such.

I do think, however, that there'd be many more ignostics if its meaning was better understood.

What did you dislike about Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts?

Was it the congestion? If so...I can kinda understand.
It's not that I disliked them terribly, it's just that those are states I've spent any significant amount of time in and I liked Italy better.

Well, ignosticism is a highly specialised and pretty inaccessible branch of agnosticism (or atheism, in my case). It's quite hard to explain - much more so than atheism or agnosticism - which is probably why there's less people identifying as such.

I do think, however, that there'd be many more ignostics if its meaning was better understood.
Yeah, that is true and yeah, there probably would be more ignostics if everyone knew what it meant. Hell, there would probably be more ignostics if firefox's spell check didn't catch the word every time I wrote it (i.e., if the word was even in the dictionary...).

It's not that I disliked them terribly, it's just that those are states I've spent any significant amount of time in and I liked Italy better.

Climate and food being biggies, I'd imagine.

Christian; anti-abortion, pro-life, pro-choice, anti-ban (yes, all of those things all at once); only ever lived in the US and haven't yet visited Europe.

Climate and food being biggies, I'd imagine.
It's not just that, the buildings were prettier, if you went into a city nearly everything you'd need was a walkable distance, the attitude was so much more relaxed and nicer. Though it was a little annoying to be hit on so much... I'm not sure if that's worse than being stared at instead though.

I'm not religious at all, believe abortion can/should only be legally and ethically justified in life-threatening situations, and prefer America a great deal more, especially when compared with Europe in particular.

It's not just that, the buildings were prettier, if you went into a city nearly everything you'd need was a walkable distance, the attitude was so much more relaxed and nicer. Though it was a little annoying to be hit on so much... I'm not sure if that's worse than being stared at instead though.

What? You don't like a bizarre mish-mash of sixties and seventies architecture, with rusting steel mills in the background? Golly!

There seem to be a few people who claim to be non-religious yet don't like the idea of abortion. What's with that?

As for me:

Agnostic
Pro-choice
(some of) Europe.

There seem to be a few people who claim to be non-religious yet don't like the idea of abortion. What's with that?
They probably bought into the propaganda spread by the religious anti-choice groups.

Asatru, don't really care about abortion, but I don't think it should be used in place of birth control, I've only lived in the US so I can't really make an honest desicion between USA and Europe.

There seem to be a few people who claim to be non-religious yet don't like the idea of abortion. What's with that?

Why is that surprising? Lots of people "don't like the idea of abortion." Even those of us who think it should be available generally don't think of having an abortion as a good thing. A woman simply may find it to be the best action to take in a bad situation.

Atheist, pro-choice, US, though I'd love to be able to visit France and the rest of Europe. I just fell in love with the country side on the road from Paris to Mont St. Michel and have been dying to go back there again.

Please state your religion (or absence of), your stance on abortion and whether you prefer the United States of America or Europe.

Protestant Christian, neutral to this issue, and Europe.

I am an atheist, I actually oppose abortions because they decrease the population, not on moral grounds, I think that if state welfare and cradle-to-grave support is available abortions would be unnecessary, even if the women was given the welfare to support the child but still didn't want to, the state could bring it up via adoption or whatnot. I think abortion is a cause of capitalism.

I am from the Europe of the South Seas :)

Why is that surprising? Lots of people "don't like the idea of abortion." Even those of us who think it should be available generally don't think of having an abortion as a good thing. A woman simply may find it to be the best action to take in a bad situation.

I suppose I phrased it badly.

From a post above:
ethically justified in life-threatening situations
How is having a termination unethical when only a religious person would consider a small bundle of cells to be a living entity?


I am an atheist, I actually oppose abortions because they decrease the population, not on moral grounds, I think that if state welfare and cradle-to-grave support is available abortions would be unnecessary, even if the women was given the welfare to support the child but still didn't want to, the state could bring it up via adoption or whatnot. I think abortion is a cause of capitalism.

I am from the Europe of the South Seas :)

The human population is already far too high to be sustained. While I won't go so far as to suggest something like eugenics, unwanted children would only make things worse. That probably sounds really bad.

Agnostic (I still go to church with my family, but mostly for the donuts and apple juice at the end of mass), Pro Choice, never been to Europe.

I actually oppose abortions because they decrease the population,
Why is decreasing the population a bad thing?

Why is decreasing the population a bad thing?

Bigger population, more taxpayers.

Bigger population, more taxpayers.
And more taxpayers to take care of. More schools to build, more resources to expend, more food to grow...

The current human population already isn't sustainable, why are more of us a better thing?

I suppose I phrased it badly.

From a post above:

How is having a termination unethical when only a religious person would consider a small bundle of cells to be a living entity?




The human population is already far too high to be sustained. While I won't go so far as to suggest something like eugenics, unwanted children would only make things worse. That probably sounds really bad.

No child should go unwanted by the community, also eugenics has a bad name because the Nazi's practiced it, but when it comes to severe disabilities it's a good idea.

No child should go unwanted by the community, also eugenics has a bad name because the Nazi's practiced it, but when it comes to severe disabilities it's a good idea.
Who cares about the community? It's the woman who has to carry it and give birth to it, not the community.

I suppose I phrased it badly.

From a post above:

How is having a termination unethical when only a religious person would consider a small bundle of cells to be a living entity?

Many people place value on what that "bundle of cells" will become. Even as a religious person, I don't see an embryo as a living organism. I wouldn't classify it as an organism until it has a rudimentary nervous system and thus can respond to stimulus as an entity - generally around 12 weeks. And I wouldn't even begin to classify the fetus as a living human person until it begins to show signs of consciousness - closer to 22 weeks. (Note: from a religious point of view, this leaves out the concept of ensoulment, largely because I don't have the first clue when that would happen. I tend to think it probably coincides with the beginning of consciousness, but I can't really say that with any certainty at all).

However, I value the potential of the embryo/fetus itself and what it can become. As such, I am generally opposed to abortion, although I would never suggest that it is my place to make that decision for another.

And more taxpayers to take care of. More schools to build, more resources to expend, more food to grow...

The current human population already isn't sustainable, why are more of us a better thing?

Well it depends, if your China or India population control is a good idea, but if your Europe or my country it's a good idea. I actually oppose any kind of immigration because it creates un-integrated groups of sometimes uneducated immigrants without the cultural workethic and community purpose that must go with a welfare state in order to sustain it. See Finland for this.

Who cares about the community? It's the woman who has to carry it and give birth to it, not the community.

Well the state can pay for everything, including child care, and the mother can do whatever level or care she feels best to do, you know to develop a personal connection to the child. But as you know in todays modern world child care is used alot.

Well the state can pay for everything, including child care, and the mother can do whatever level or care she feels best to do, you know to develop a personal connection to the child. But as you know in todays modern world child care is used alot.
It's not just about what happens when the kid is out, pregnancies take a lot of resources and are generally a bit of a risk for a woman. If a woman does not want to go through with it, she shouldn't have to.

It's not just about what happens when the kid is out, pregnancies take a lot of resources and are generally a bit of a risk for a woman. If a woman does not want to go through with it, she shouldn't have to.

Oh I am not saying she should have to, I am all for that choice if she is adamant about it. I am simply stating that she should be made aware that state support and welfare will be made available for her if she decides that she wants to have the child, kinda like an incentive but the choice is still hers. I think that the abortion rate would be far lower if this kinda welfare was readily available and actually totally free, like Finland again for example. I think alot of abortions come down to the mother not having the financial means and time to care for the child adequately and therefore an abortion would be the appropriate thing to do. That's what I mean that abortions are a result of capitalism, and honestly I think that abortions are a tragedy in this way.

It's not that I disliked them terribly, it's just that those are states I've spent any significant amount of time in and I liked Italy better.

you should come to texas, it's BEAUTIFUL this time of year



..................just don't make any eye contact with any of the locals, or any sudden movements

and for the love of god, don't mention ANYTHING about not being a christian or anything slightly left of republicanism

if you manage to avoid all that, then i think you'll fall in love with the open skies of the Republic of Texas

: )

Oh I am not saying she should have to, I am all for that choice if she is adamant about it. I am simply stating that she should be made aware that state support and welfare will be made available for her if she decides that she wants to have the child, kinda like an incentive but the choice is still hers. I think that the abortion rate would be far lower if this kinda welfare was readily available and actually totally free, like Finland again for example. I think alot of abortions come down to the mother not having the financial means and time to care for the child adequately and therefore an abortion would be the appropriate thing to do. That's what I mean that abortions are a result of capitalism, and honestly I think that abortions are a tragedy in this way.
I think that the best way to lower the rate of abortions is to properly educate people about birth control methods and make contraceptives freely available to those who wish to employ them.

I think that the best way to lower the rate of abortions is to properly educate people about birth control methods and make contraceptives freely available to those who wish to employ them.

Well yeah, that too, but in developed Western countries this isn't so much a problem, I mean we all know very young exactly about contraception etc.

I think that the best way to lower the rate of abortions is to properly educate people about birth control methods and make contraceptives freely available to those who wish to employ them.

Hear hear!!

I'm an American, I'm agnostic, and I find abortion horrible and morally wrong, but I do not think it's the government's place to tell people what to do in the privacy of their lives. Beside I think that any higher power will deal with it.

Areligious, pro-choice, and I live in the USA, but enjoyed what I have seen of Europe (and the rest of the world), so I don't know which I really prefer.

I'm an American, I'm agnostic, and I find abortion horrible and morally wrong, but I do not think it's the government's place to tell people what to do in the privacy of their lives. Beside I think that any higher power will deal with it.

I think a society that can't deal with it's problems without resorting to superstition is doomed never to progress.

Christian and yet Pro-Choice. Mainly because I don't like the government telling anyone what they can/can't do with their bodies. Its up to them to make their own decision.

No, I haven't been to Europe.

I think a society that can't deal with it's problems without resorting to superstition is doomed never to progress.

I think that people who can't deal with opposing opinions without resorting to such blatant discrimination and bigotry to other peoples beliefs aren't helping.

Christian and yet Pro-Choice. Mainly because I don't like the government telling anyone what they can/can't do with their bodies. Its up to them to make their own decision.

No, I haven't been to Europe.



I think that people who can't deal with opposing opinions without resorting to such blatant discrimination and bigotry to other peoples beliefs aren't helping.

No, the difference is, I can justify my beliefs in reality according to rational and objective means, religion cannot be justified in that way because it can't stand up to objective analysis, it falls apart. So yes I do not respect your right to think irrationally.

I'm Neo-pagan and pro-freedom and -quality-of-life. Take that as ye will.

Thank you for saying that, Laterale. Considering that there are millions of thinking people holding both pro-choice and pro-life views, claiming that either side is evil/stupid/brainwashed is just immature.

I'm Christian, pro-life {but haven't always been such}, live in America and infinitely prefer Europe.

Some of you have admitted that you'd never abort your own child, and/or consider abortion to be murder, but don't think that that view should be "imposed" on the world. That's the view I myself once held. Some food for thought: if you really believe, in your gut, that's it's killing a child...is it consistent, or even fractionally moral, to then approve of others doing the slaying?

Agnostic, pro-choice, America, Europe.

:D

Andaras Prime: there are billions people on this earth who hold a belief in God. Many of them are geniuses, scholars, scientists. Don't you think it's just a *bit* arrogant to dismiss them all as stupid?

So yes I do not respect your right to think irrationally.

One, you should respect anyone's right to think as irrationally as they want. And yet, discrimination based on beliefs, no matter how irrational YOU think they are, is still discrimination. So, no, you have no justification at all. In a purely humanistic approach, then yes, your arguments have basis. What you don't understand is the fact that not all people base their beliefs in a purely worldly manner. There really is no justification at all for prejudice, and so, your argument falls apart there. As for 'doomed never to progress' religions of all kinds tend not to have much negative impact at all on a civilization's progress. Nor does it mean that if it is having a negative impact, that all who adhere to the religion agree with the others in the same religion. If it were any other religion, you'd probably be screaming tolerance, but instead, since its ok to think Christians are stupid, naturally you base your argument on the beliefs of a fraction of the population.

As for Parcoo, thank you for agreeing. And like a mature person, I will respect your argument. I see where your coming from, but I still think it shouldn't be my decision to make.

Andaras Prime: there are billions people on this earth who hold a belief in God. Many of them are geniuses, scholars, scientists. Don't you think it's just a *bit* arrogant to dismiss them all as stupid?

Yes but the majority of those people when it gets down to it don't actually really believe any of it, it's more a tradition and a sense of consolation rather than literal interpretation and belief. For example, the polls in the US show the majority of people believe in God when we know that it's not really the truth, at heart most of us are atheists at heart because we are mature adults and it makes the best logical sense. Their aren't enough churches in the US to fit all those who say they go to them every Sunday, it just feels good to (lie) say we believe in God when being polled.

Yes but the majority of those people when it gets down to it don't actually really believe any of it, it's more a tradition and a sense of consolation rather than literal interpretation and belief. For example, the polls in the US show the majority of people believe in God when we know that it's not really the truth, at heart most of us are atheists at heart because we are mature adults and it makes the best logical sense. Their aren't enough churches in the US to fit all those who say they go to them every Sunday, it just feels good to (lie) say we believe in God when being polled.

Ok, then prove there isn't a God, give me undeniable proof that their isn't a God.

I am Roman Catholic (There's a difference between Catholics and Roman Catholics, though so minor that we usually go by the same name), extremely religious, strongly pro-life (though I do believe that abortion should be legal if a life is in danger, and FOR NO OTHER REASON. If you don't want a baby, don't make one).

Europe is beautiful, but I still strongly prefer America (mostly because the people who I met that lived there were mean to me:()

Pro-choice. A fetus isnt a life form, it's a bunch of under-developed cells.
Really? Scientists agree that the baby can feel pain quite early in the pregnancy. Even if this "fetus" doesn't have a soul, he/she, like an animal (most believe that animals don't have souls), can feel pain, and even think and move. In most abortions, they reach inside the womb and rip the baby apart limb-from-limb. How can you say that's not inhumane? And for those people who say it's okay to do one of those abortions where the baby doesn't feel any pain: If I poisoned someone, they died, and I was caught, would I be let off because "they didn't feel any pain"?

the 52% who believe the universe was created within the last 6,000 years.
I believe in evolution and the big bang; I just believe God made evolution and the big bang happen.:)

Hell, there would probably be more ignostics if firefox's spell check didn't catch the word every time I wrote it (i.e., if the word was even in the dictionary...).

My dictionary has 'agnostic' in it *pats dictionary affectionately), for my dictionary is superior to yours, as is all my stuff (Only joking:cool:)

Yes but the majority of those people when it gets down to it don't actually really believe any of it

And you know each and every thought of those people how? Oversights get you nowhere.

it's more a tradition and a sense of consolation

there could be a reason that religion fulfills such base human needs as consolation, tradition, association, and social activity...

we know that it's not really the truth

NO, you think its not really the truth. You are laboring under the assumption that these polls (notice: no references) are accurate.

I believe in evolution and the big bang; I just believe God made evolution and the big bang happen.

I see we share beliefs.

As for pro-choice/pro-life, I only assert that its not my choice to make; personally, I would never have an abortion (since I'm male :)). Seriously, I would never ask my mate to have an abortion.

Ok, then prove there isn't a God, give me undeniable proof that their isn't a God.

A truly omnipotent and loving God would have the power to eliminate the "their/there" grammar mistakes once and for all. Yet this hasn't happened.

QED.


(That and the lack of proof, and impossibility of providing proof, supporting those who claim that God does exist.)

If you don't want a baby, don't make one).

In most cases, the people in question were not trying to make a baby, they were having sex. The two are not necessarily the same thing.

Really? Scientists agree that the baby can feel pain quite early in the pregnancy. Even if this "fetus" doesn't have a soul, he/she, like an animal (most believe that animals don't have souls), can feel pain, and even think and move. In most abortions, they reach inside the womb and rip the baby apart limb-from-limb. How can you say that's not inhumane? And for those people who say it's okay to do one of those abortions where the baby doesn't feel any pain: If I poisoned someone, they died, and I was caught, would I be let off because "they didn't feel any pain"?

Who cares? No one is obligated to give up 9 months of their life, at risk to their own life, unable to function normally, and in great pain to keep someone who ran into their car alive.

My dictionary has 'agnostic' in it *pats dictionary affectionately), for my dictionary is superior to yours, as is all my stuff (Only joking:cool:)

What has agnostic got to do with anything? He's talking about ignosticism: the rejection of the God question.

"their/there" grammar mistakes

While I find your grammar policing to be admirable, I find that you have contributed nothing at all to the conversation other than assert your grammatical superiority. That and restate an argument that has already been stated.

Yes, they probably were having sex.

While I find your grammar policing to be admirable, I find that you have contributed nothing at all to the conversation other than assert your grammatical superiority.


:)



That and restate an argument that has already been stated.


I was jumping into an argument about religion. Just trying to fit in.

Its ok. I try too.

As for proper grammar, I support it. We must unite against the destruction of language by teenagers on Instant Messengers! :)

Ok, then prove there isn't a God, give me undeniable proof that their isn't a God.

No the burden is on you, I believe what I believe and if you want me to justify it I certainly will, but if you belief in some kind of supernatural entity the burden is on you to justify given available evidence to rationally come to a conclusion. I came to my conclusion given the lack of evidence for such a being, plus the reality of world existence etc. What objective and critical evidence can you provide for the existence of said supernatural entity (specifically the one you believe in).

I cannot prove right now that such a being does not exist, but then again a few hundred years ago I couldn't prove that the world was circular or the nature of the universe, just because my knowledge is limited is does not mean I should believe in the flying spaghetti monster because I can't disprove it. By your logic you should believe in everything you can't (at the present) prove either way. I believe in the future science will progress to the extent that we can cast off all irrational beliefs in favor of logic and rational discourse, and just as we discovered that the Sun was not a giant God and that the sky was heaven, we will eventually cast off all such beliefs that have no credible evidence.

Its ok. I try too.

As for proper grammar, I support it. We must unite against the destruction of language by teenagers on Instant Messengers! :)

I do sA, weL sed. ppl must rly Lern how 2 spk propRlE. It wud b anarchy othRwIz. I must continu 2 insist, howevR, dat d case 4 God iz less thN weL established.

Neo-Pagan/Wiccan, pro choice, America and Europe

Personal belief is just that, personal. You may have a problem with people believing in a supernatural force, Andaras Prime, but you still haven't provided an excuse as to why you would discriminate on beliefs.

True, my most Loyal Opposition, that the case is not well established (I enjoyed your reply, by the way). Which is why we should use personal exploration as a basis for faith, or lack thereof.

Alkenrelash, your point is taken and endorsed. That doesn't mean much, coming from me. I agree completely.

I thought that this was an argument based on abortion and its 'required' association with Christianity. Lets get on with it.

Who cares? No one is obligated to give up 9 months of their life, at risk to their own life, unable to function normally, and in great pain to keep someone who ran into their car alive.

I noticed you said 'obligated' (compel, force someone to...). Unless it is rape, no one 'forced' this woman to have sex.

Yes but the majority of those people when it gets down to it don't actually really believe any of it, it's more a tradition and a sense of consolation rather than literal interpretation and belief. For example, the polls in the US show the majority of people believe in God when we know that it's not really the truth, at heart most of us are atheists at heart because we are mature adults and it makes the best logical sense. Their aren't enough churches in the US to fit all those who say they go to them every Sunday, it just feels good to (lie) say we believe in God when being polled.

Are you serious? Sure, for many people religion is a cultural thing instead of a catalyzing relationship with God as it's meant to be...but you do NOT have the right to dismiss the billions of people whose beliefs are wholehearted and grounded in evidence and logic.

If you're going to claim that 'mature, logical adults are Atheists at heart', I have the right to claim that everyone, when they look up at the stars, knows deep in their gut that there's a God. But it seems a bit of a silly argument to me.

Dios Mio, this thread makes me look conservative. I'm not, really. :p

Oh, but, Kinda Sensible People: I know it seems like having a baby does mean "giving up" nine months of life, but you really just mean it'd be inconvenient. For example, maybe a college student would have to take a year off and move in with her parents for a while...but it's not like life and joy will go on hiatus. I do agree that it takes a bit of altruism to make that decision, though...

Dios Mio, this thread makes me look conservative. I'm not, really.

Moderate? That's what I am. I believe both Liberals and Conservatives have some good points.

If you're going to claim that 'mature, logical adults are Atheists at heart', I have the right to claim that everyone, when they look up at the stars, knows deep in their gut that there's a God. But it seems a bit of a silly argument to me.

Indeed. Albert Einstein, for example, believed in God. I'm not always that religious; my relationship with God is like with a friend. Sometimes I'm mad at Him, but I have never questioned His existence. I have even read articles and books that atheists claim "Opened their eyes to to truth", including snippets from 'The God Delusion'. I have yet to be convinced.

I am a follower of Jesus (aka: Christian) pro-life and a proud American

So you are a carpenter, give away all you earn and sleep in fields or friend's houses? Are you making your own cross or do you think the good town's people will make one for you? I suppose now that we have tetanus shots, you don't need to worry about the nails, though you're probably not worried as daddy will raise after 3 days...oh well.

"If Jesus came back and saw what was being done in his name, he wouldn't be able to stop throwing up." Woody Allen

So you are a carpenter, give away all you earn and sleep in fields or friend's houses? Are you making your own cross or do you think the good town's people will make one for you? I suppose now that we have tetanus shots, you don't need to worry about the nails, though you're probably not worried as daddy will raise after 3 days...oh well.

Ummm. How did you get all that from 'I am a follower of Jesus (aka: Christian) pro-life and a proud American'?

Ummm. How did you get all that from 'I am a follower of Jesus (aka: Christian) pro-life and a proud American'?

Amazing, isn't it? :p You can always find characters online - that's why I enjoy forums. :)

Amazing, isn't it? :p You can always find characters online - that's why I enjoy forums. :)

Oh comon, the only reason you come online is for the porn, admit it! ;) :p

I just love the way Americans generalise 40+ different countries and refer to them as "Europe".

You can't compare the two... especially seen as 99% of the people commenting will have never have even visited the one or the other places.

I have even read articles and books that atheists claim "Opened their eyes to to truth", including snippets from 'The God Delusion'. I have yet to be convinced.

In defense of atheists, though, "The God Delusion" is awful as anything other than an introduction to the topic. ;) It wasn't intended for a scholarly audience.

I just love the way Americans generalise 40+ different countries and refer to them as "Europe".

You can't compare the two... especially seen as 99% of the people commenting will have never have even visited the one or the other places.

You can compare the two - you can compare two of anything, even if it might be difficult. :p

In defense of atheists, though, "The God Delusion" is awful as anything other than an introduction to the topic. ;) It wasn't intended for a scholarly audience.

Oooooooooooooooh. This will be a great shock for an atheist I know (who also reccomended the book to me) that based his entire life on that book. Maybe I shouldn't tell him...

[COLOR="Red"]Indeed. Albert Einstein, for example, believed in God.

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. (Albert Einstein, 1954, The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press)

A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.
(Albert Einstein, "Religion and Science", New York Times Magazine, 9 November 1930)

I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and with the awareness and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature. (Albert Einstein, The World as I See It)

Smarter than the average bear that Albert :)

EDIT: For the OP - Irreligious; pro-choice; on an individual basis.

Hmmm... Perhaps I was mistake.:rolleyes:

I guess my resources were faulty. Perhaps I read the 'lie that was systematically repeated'.

This is interesting, though:

[Einstein] argues that conflicts between science and religion "have all sprung from fatal errors." However "even though the realms of religion and science in themselves are clearly marked off from each other" there are "strong reciprocal relationships and dependencies" ... "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind ... a legitimate conflict between science and religion cannot exist."

Hmmm... Perhaps I was mistake.:rolleyes:

With grammar like that... :p

Anyway. Agnostic / Pro-choice / Have never been out of my home country (Australia) so I will say the Solomon Islands.

Hmmm... Perhaps I was mistake.:rolleyes:

I guess my resources were faulty. Perhaps I read the 'lie that was systematically repeated'.

This is interesting, though:

[Einstein] argues that conflicts between science and religion "have all sprung from fatal errors." However "even though the realms of religion and science in themselves are clearly marked off from each other" there are "strong reciprocal relationships and dependencies" ... "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind ... a legitimate conflict between science and religion cannot exist."

You misunderstand his meaning of religion:

"It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. My views are near those of Spinoza: admiration for the beauty of and belief in the logical simplicity of the order and harmony of the universe which we can grasp humbly and only imperfectly. I believe that we have to content ourselves with our imperfect knowledge and understanding and treat values and moral obligations as a purely human problem--the most important of all human problems."

He believes in awe of Nature, that is his religion and...

"I have never imputed to Nature a purpose or a goal, or anything that could be understood as anthropomorphic."

He's not talking about mysticism either:

"The mystical trend of our time, which shows itself particularly in the rampant growth of the so-called Theosophy and Spirtualism, is for me no more than a symptom of weakness and confusion."

"What I see in nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of humility. This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism."

The 'Nature' thing doesn't really seem like religion to me, but oh, well...

Atheist, Pro-Choice, Europe, don't care (you find all kinds of people in any place)

Agnostic, childfree, so prochoice by extension, and I'm afraid of Antarctica.

Implicit atheist, pro choice, Europe.

Sikhk, Pro Choice, UK.

Hell, there would probably be more ignostics if firefox's spell check didn't catch the word every time I wrote it (i.e., if the word was even in the dictionary...).

My dictionary has 'agnostic' in it *pats dictionary affectionately), for my dictionary is superior to yours, as is all my stuff (Only joking:cool:)
Yes, my dictionary has agnostic, but it doesn't have ignostic.

Agnostic atheist, pro-choice in all cases up until the fetus is determined to be conscious/sentient (I don't know enough medically to say when this is accurately, I believe it's around 5-6 months in), there are parts of Europe I prefer to parts of America, and visa versa, both are incredibly diverse and asking an 'us or them' question is far too simplistic and generalising.

Smarter than the average bear that Albert :)

EDIT: For the OP - Irreligious; pro-choice; on an individual basis.

Einstein was a pantheist. *nod*

Follower of Raukar the Great Sky Dragon, pro-choice, Araraukarian. :D

Please state your religion (or absence of), your stance on abortion and whether you prefer the United States of America or Europe.

Example:

I am an atheist. I am pro-choice. I live in America and I like it better than Europe.

I'm very religious, I am pro-choice, and I live in the US. I've been to Europe a lot over the years (including living there for years at a time). I prefer the US, but not solely for its political system. I prefer the geography and open space over here - it's just too crowded in Europe.

I'm very religious, I am pro-choice, and I live in the US. I've been to Europe a lot over the years (including living there for years at a time). I prefer the US, but not solely for its political system. I prefer the geography and open space over here - it's just too crowded in Europe.

You've mainly been in the cities, haven't you? The countryside in northwest France trumps anything the midwest has to offer.

Christian, pro-choice up to the 12th week after that things get murky for me, US, I haven't ever been to Europe so I can't say, but some of the authoritarian crap over there scares me.

Christian, pro-choice up to the 12th week after that things get murky for me, US, I haven't ever been to Europe so I can't say, but some of the authoritarian crap over there scares me.

Ohhhh please tell me some of this authoriterian crap?

Christian, pro-choice up to the 12th week after that things get murky for me, US, I haven't ever been to Europe so I can't say, but some of the authoritarian crap over there scares me.

... uh, what?

Depends what part of Europe, but an American is scared by European authoritarianism?

Atheist, pro-choice, never been to the States, but Europe is nice.

Ohhhh please tell me some of this authoriterian crap?

can't remember some of it right now.......only minor things, like the "we tell you how to name your kids" laws and such.

... uh, what?

Depends what part of Europe, but an American is scared by European authoritarianism?

Atheist, pro-choice, never been to the States, but Europe is nice.

A lot of the American authoritarianism scares me as well.

Ohhhh please tell me some of this authoriterian crap?

Walk outside in London, and tell me how many cameras you see.

can't remember some of it right now.......only minor things, like the "we tell you how to name your kids" laws and such.

Wow! I only asked because I don't feel like I labour under the yoke of an authoriterian goverment, and wondered what you are talking about.

Heh likewise I have never heard of this 'we tell you how to name your kids'. Do you know where about's in Europe that is from?

Walk outside in London, and tell me how many cameras you see.

Ahhh yes, that is very true. I don't like that myself.

Walk outside in London, and tell me how many cameras you see.

If you've got nothing to hide...:D

Wow! I only asked because I don't feel like I labour under the yoke of an authoriterian goverment, and wondered what you are talking about.

Heh likewise I have never heard of this 'we tell you how to name your kids'. Do you know where about's in Europe that is from?

I never said you labor under an authoritarian government. As far as the naming thing, I hear it's all over Europe. They do it in Mexico too. It's just really annoying and scary to me.

If you've got nothing to hide...:D

:p that doesn't work in the US though. Do I have anything to hide in my glove box? nope. Do I have to let the cops search there without a warrant? nope.

Also, in America I can have my guns.

If you've got nothing to hide...:D

If you think that way, help me set up these cameras in the local mosques...

I never said you labor under an authoritarian government. As far as the naming thing, I hear it's all over Europe. They do it in Mexico too. It's just really annoying and scary to me.

Heh and I never said that you said I did, but it was infered from the comments you did make.

I can tell you that as far as I know, there are no laws restricting the naming of your children here in the UK, also I have never heard of it anywhere, umm perhaps I'll go google it.

:p that doesn't work in the US though. Do I have anything to hide in my glove box? nope. Do I have to let the cops search there without a warrant? nope.

Also, in America I can have my guns.

I'm not in favor of it, to be quite honest.

If you think that way, help me set up these cameras in the local mosques...

Haven't you used the exact same argument in the past?

Christian (Anabaptist), believes abortion is a contrived and over-worked issue, and though lives in the US has been to Europe and liked it better. (Grass is always greener on the other side of the lake, or something like that.)

I hate any acknowledgment that religion isn't bullshit.

Pro-choice. A fetus isnt a life form, it's a bunch of under-developed cells.

European, America is a political dump. Nice countryside though :)

our politics only exist on TV

Haven't you used the exact same argument in the past?

Not exactly, no.

What I find ironic is that the things I argue for are already in place in some European countries. The UK, especially. They've gone far past where I would have gone.

Even I have my limits.

I noticed you said 'obligated' (compel, force someone to...). Unless it is rape, no one 'forced' this woman to have sex.

No, I meant obligated, as in forced by laws passed by self important little sexist gits on moral crusades to take care of a person they are only tangentially responsible for at the cost of 9 months of their life.

And no, I don't care about the baby, you're right. That's why I said I'm pro-death. Even if it is another ensouled person, it doesn't matter. I'm not legally obligated to give up 9 months of my life to keep you alive either. Sure, it would be nice if I did, but I'm not obligated to do it.

I just love the way Americans generalise 40+ different countries and refer to them as "Europe".

You can't compare the two... especially seen as 99% of the people commenting will have never have even visited the one or the other places.

similar to a European generalizing about an American experience they had in New Jersey as if the other 49 states are all the same.

Please state your religion (or absence of), your stance on abortion and whether you prefer the United States of America or Europe.

None of your business, none of your business, and none of your business.

You've mainly been in the cities, haven't you? The countryside in northwest France trumps anything the midwest has to offer.

I've been in the countryside in France, Belgium, Germany, and Austria.

There's more to the US than just the Midwest.

Heh and I never said that you said I did, but it was infered from the comments you did make.

I can tell you that as far as I know, there are no laws restricting the naming of your children here in the UK, also I have never heard of it anywhere, umm perhaps I'll go google it.

I know they have it in like Denmark, and Germany, and such, I don't know about the UK. I said I haven't been there (to that part of the world even) so I can't really form a complete opinion.

I know they have it in like Denmark, and Germany, and such, I don't know about the UK. I said I haven't been there (to that part of the world even) so I can't really form a complete opinion.

Similar laws exist in my country, but they are not really restrictive, unless you’d want to call your child "little shit" or something.

Similar laws exist in my country, but they are not really restrictive, unless you’d want to call your child "little shit" or something.

I should have the right to name my child "little shit".

I should have the right to name my child "little shit".

But than your child can never appear on TV :eek:

I should have the right to name my child "little shit".

It amounts to child abuse, so no, you shouldn't.

I should have the right to name my child "little shit".

Inded, and it is one I actualy do use quite often, along with the words come here you.:D

Here's some more authoritarian crap in Europe:

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=/ForeignBureaus/archive/200708/INT20070814a.html

gnostic, prochoice, Canada.

I would never be ignostic, if I read it correctly.

The first definition of this word is the view that a coherent definition of "God" must be put forward before the question of the existence of God can be meaningfully discussed. If the chosen definition cannot be verified empirically, the ignostic believes that it is not coherent. In that case, the ignostic holds the noncognitivist view that the truth value of the existence of God (as there defined) is meaningless (in other words, whether it is true or false does not matter).

The second definition is synonymous with theological noncognitivism, and skips the step of first asking "what is meant by God?" before proclaiming it meaningless.

Since the idea of god cannot be empirically verifed, it is therefore meaningless?

How odd. Many things that are meaningful in life are impossible to verify empirically. The simplicity of children's laughter. The joy of sex. Dancing like no one's looking.

Humanity always been about being different and that's unlikely to change any millennia soon. I'm an atheist, anti-capitalist, preferably a pacafist, anti-democratic, pro-socialist and for all those reasons it becomes fairly obvious that I don't like the corrupted united states of America.

Walk outside in London, and tell me how many cameras you see.
Oh no, cameras seeing you in public places, that's so much worse than government agencies listening in on your private phone conversations without your permission.

I never said you labor under an authoritarian government. As far as the naming thing, I hear it's all over Europe. They do it in Mexico too. It's just really annoying and scary to me.
Is this just stuff like "we won't let you name your kid 'shithead'" or something?

:p that doesn't work in the US though. Do I have anything to hide in my glove box? nope. Do I have to let the cops search there without a warrant? nope.
Can the cops wiretap your phones without a warrant? Why yes they can.

Also, in America I can have my guns.
Ah yes, guns... as long as that amendment is protected who cares, right? Never mind that it was intended for well regulated militias, not just random paranoid gun ownership, but whatever.

I am a Mormon, Pro-Life and I prefer the USA.

Christian, Pro-Life, And... why only those two choices... Taiwan is my choice, though I love some of the american culture, and admire european architecture and art. btw, I am Irish-american. lol

Catholic, pro-choice, live in USA but have never been to Europe

Is this just stuff like "we won't let you name your kid 'shithead'" or something?Yes. Some European countries goes a bit further and restrict people to stuff that isn't 'too original' or 'spelt funneh'. Rose, for example, is typically an acceptable name. Rhozhe probably won't be. Likewise, Freya is usually acceptable while Vanadis (same thing) typically isn't.

On a side note, am I the only one who thinks it's a bit perverse to name one's kid after a sex goddess? - Just occured to me...

Ah yes, guns... as long as that amendment is protected who cares, right? Never mind that it was intended for well regulated militias, not just random paranoid gun ownership, but whatever.

Actually, you're wrong. If you read the writings of the Founding Fathers, and read the Federalist Papers, you'll find out how wrong you are.

It was held to be an individual right until Miller. That time period also brought us nice things like the Narcotics Act, and came right after Prohibition.

A recent court decision has held it to be an individual right. Constitutional law scholars generally agree that it's an individual right, unless you want "people" in the 2nd Amendment to mean something different from "people" in the 1st.

Yes. Some European countries goes a bit further and restrict people to stuff that isn't 'too original' or 'spelt funneh'. Rose, for example, is typically an acceptable name. Rhozhe probably won't be. Likewise, Freya is usually acceptable while Vanadis (same thing) typically isn't.

On a side note, am I the only one who thinks it's a bit perverse to name one's kid after a sex goddess? - Just occured to me...
Well, at some point weren't the sex goddesses basically fertility goddesses and all? Wanting your kids to have lots of babies isn't especially perverse... or maybe just wanting your kids to have a cool name, regardless of the meaning.

Actually, you're wrong. If you read the writings of the Founding Fathers, and read the Federalist Papers, you'll find out how wrong you are.

It was held to be an individual right until Miller. That time period also brought us nice things like the Narcotics Act, and came right after Prohibition.

A recent court decision has held it to be an individual right. Constitutional law scholars generally agree that it's an individual right, unless you want "people" in the 2nd Amendment to mean something different from "people" in the 1st.
Ugh, whatever, I don't live in the states and I don't plan on ever living there. The laws there are generally more authoritarian than I like and not nearly liberal enough, the rate of gun related homicides is also rather disturbing, so I really don't care.

This thread should have had a poll.

Atheist, pro-choice, Europe (although I will admit to envying [most of] the US Constitution).

Can the cops wiretap your phones without a warrant? Why yes they can.
:rolleyes:


Ah yes, guns... as long as that amendment is protected who cares, right? Never mind that it was intended for well regulated militias, not just random paranoid gun ownership, but whatever.
Never mind that you have no clue what the hell you are talking about....but, I was being facetious.

Andaras Prime: there are billions people on this earth who hold a belief in God. Many of them are geniuses, scholars, scientists. Don't you think it's just a *bit* arrogant to dismiss them all as stupid?

Although I don't agree with AP's position, I dislike arguments from authority intensely. The fact that clever people believe something is irrelevant, the important question is why do they believe it. If they believe for rational reasons which they can share with the rest of us then they're worth listening to, otherwise they're irrelevant.

To give you an example: not so very long ago, a respectable Geneticist at Cornell University wrote a book claiming that modern genetics ruled out the possiblity of evolution. He did not, however, reach this conclusion through science or rational thought; he'd converted to fundamentalist Christianity while he was going through a personal crisis as a result of a messy divorce. The fact that he's intelligent and educated is not important: his arguments are vacuous and devoid of logic.

Indeed. Albert Einstein, for example, believed in God.

Yes, but not in the traditional theistic sense. He expressly rejected the notion of a personal deity and of life after death.

I'm not always that religious; my relationship with God is like with a friend. Sometimes I'm mad at Him, but I have never questioned His existence. I have even read articles and books that atheists claim "Opened their eyes to to truth", including snippets from 'The God Delusion'. I have yet to be convinced.

I've always liked David Hume myself.

:rolleyes:
What, I'm just saying that I'd prefer if the cops are looking at me while I'm in public on a million cameras to eavesdropping on my private telephone conversations.

What, I'm just saying that I'd prefer if the cops are looking at me while I'm in public on a million cameras to eavesdropping on my private telephone conversations.

I wasn't the one bitching about the cameras.

In defense of atheists, though, "The God Delusion" is awful as anything other than an introduction to the topic. ;) It wasn't intended for a scholarly audience.

*awards enormous cookie*

If anybody found The God Delusion lacking but is interested in atheist responses to traditional theistic arguments then I recommend the following:

Teleological Argument:
Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion by David Hume
The Blind Watchmaker by Richard Dawkins

Cosmological Argument:
Why I am not a Christian by Bertrand Russell (short but very sweet :))
An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding by David Hume (destroys the necessary link between Cause and Effect which the Cosmological Argument rests on)

Ontological Argument:
The Ontological Argument and the Sin of Hubris (http://www.philosophynow.org/issue53/53carey.htm) by Toni Carey

Moral Argument:
The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins (provides a naturalistic explanation for 'moral' impulses)

Various arguments referencing the Bible
Jesus by A N Wilson
The Age of Reason by Thomas Paine

I also strongly recommend the Internet Infidels Library (http://www.infidels.org/library/). If anyone has any other suggestions then let me know. :)

not just random paranoid gun ownership, but whatever.

So you presume to think you can tell others that they can't defend themselves? Or engage in sport? I take part in neither and yet support gun ownership. Its a fundamental right (according to the constitution) to be able to own a weapon. If you don't want a gun, you don't have to own one. As for gun related deaths, like all statistics they can be misleading.

I wasn't the one bitching about the cameras.
You said something about cops needing a warrant to look in your glove box... although I don't see why that wouldn't be true in most European countries unless you're counting whether you can be caught on camera opening your glove box as not needing a warrant...

So you presume to think you can tell others that they can't defend themselves? Or engage in sport? I take part in neither and yet support gun ownership. Its a fundamental right (according to the constitution) to be able to own a weapon. If you don't want a gun, you don't have to own one. As for gun related deaths, like all statistics they can be misleading.
I presume that I live in Canada where we don't have such shit as a right and we don't have nearly the number of gun deaths per capita or per gun that there are in the US. There are guns here, but they're largely for hunting, which is really one of the only reasons a person should have a gun really (well, as long as it's hunting for food, not sport).

You said something about cops needing a warrant to look in your glove box... although I don't see why that wouldn't be true in most European countries unless you're counting whether you can be caught on camera opening your glove box as not needing a warrant...

I am not really sure what kinds of protections you guys have in various countries, that's why I said I am pretty much ignorant, most of what I have heard isn't appealing to me though.

I am not really sure what kinds of protections you guys have in various countries, that's why I said I am pretty much ignorant, most of what I have heard isn't appealing to me though.
Look, all I know is that regardless of what I've got to hide, I don't want a government agency spying on my phone conversations. I also don't want to worry about what happens if I become accidentally pregnant and need an abortion, some states seem to restrict access to them and others have problems with people bombing clinics. I don't like that you can't buy sex toys in some states, I don't like that gay people are denied marriage rights, I don't like that people can now be detained without cause for an indefinite amount of time so long as the police claim they're suspected terrorists (read: brown and/or muslim). There are really a lot of scary authoritative things in the US, I don't think that not allowing people to name their children shithead really compares.

And if we get off talking about authoritative laws, then we can talk about other things that make me uncomfortable with the idea of living in the US, such as the lack of a health care system.

Look, all I know is that regardless of what I've got to hide, I don't want a government agency spying on my phone conversations. I also don't want to worry about what happens if I become accidentally pregnant and need an abortion, some states seem to restrict access to them and others have problems with people bombing clinics. I don't like that you can't buy sex toys in some states, I don't like that gay people are denied marriage rights, I don't like that people can now be detained without cause for an indefinite amount of time so long as the police claim they're suspected terrorists (read: brown and/or muslim). There are really a lot of scary authoritative things in the US, I don't think that not allowing people to name their children shithead really compares.

And if we get off talking about authoritative laws, then we can talk about other things that make me uncomfortable with the idea of living in the US, such as the lack of a health care system.
and like I said earlier, there is a lot of authoritative stuff in the US that scares me too.

Since the idea of god cannot be empirically verifed, it is therefore meaningless?

How odd. Many things that are meaningful in life are impossible to verify empirically. The simplicity of children's laughter. The joy of sex. Dancing like no one's looking.

If your definition of God is so worded that it could not possibly be empirically verified, then, yeah, it is meaningless.

Is children's laughter simple? Depends on how you define simple. You'd need some sort of operational definition for "simple" - I bet the waveform itself is rather complex. Is children's laughter pleasurable to the human ear? Well, let's ask some humans and find out.

Is sex joyful? Hmm, let's do some experiments and find out!!!

Is couple x dancing like no one's looking? Let's take some footage of some couples who are dancing while everyone is looking, and then some footage of a couple that believe they are dancing by themselves. Compare the two to the footage of couple x.

Atheist, pro-choice, Canada.

And this will be my last post for a few days, as I will be haunting the "coffee" shops in Amsterdam. :)

Atheist, pro-choice, Canada.

And this will be my last post for a few days, as I will be haunting the "coffee" shops in Amsterdam. :)

Brussels was cooler IMHO.

as long as it's hunting for food, not sport

But then if you allow one, you must allow the other, because they go hand in hand; you cannot force someone to tell you that they are going hunting for food or vice versa. Too little distinction in the law.

Once you allow gun ownership for hunting, then you are also allowing it for self defense, due to the fact that if you own a gun for hunting you are going to use it for self defense anyways.

Brussels was cooler IMHO.

Liege is cooler.

Atheist/Discordian. I believe that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. I live in America, but haven't seen enough of Europe to know what it's like. All I know is that the more I see of other cultures, the more I realize that they suck exactly as much as we do, only in new and exciting ways.

This abortion debate really boils down to "what is a person." While a collection of unspecialized cells shouldn't qualify, some 23% of abortions happen after the fetus (not an embryo any more) is able to make a fist. I'd say that fetuses should have at least the same rights as vertebrate non-human animals, and that abortion procedures that happen after the 8th week of development should be vetted for humaneness.

I would also say that fetuses should have full personal rights after "quickening," (i.e., an abortion past that point should only be for strong medical reasons) when the mother can feel the baby moving around. That happens after the 18th week of development, and only 1% of abortions happen past that point.

Embryos should also have some sort of protection - something along the lines of how body organs of recently deceased or still living people are treated. They are, after all, potential people. I don't want embryos sold on the open market any more than kidneys, and I don't want to see embryo keychains.

Catholic, rather moderate when it comes to the abortion issue. I believe that life starts at conception, but in certain circumstances when the pregnancy poses a grave threat to mother's physical health (eg. abdominal ectopic pregnancy, trophoblastic diseases, etc.), the benefit of saving one life may be more weighty than losing both. However, in cases such as these, and in others (rape, incest, non-viability of fetus (ex. anencephaly)) I leave it up to the patient to decide.

As for America vs. Europe... I live in neither. I am never too fond of them anyway. I'd rather go to Canada or Australia.

Unitarian ,pro-choice, American , but lived in Australia several years. I'll take Australia over either America or Europe ( at least until the next election)

Ugh, whatever, I don't live in the states and I don't plan on ever living there. The laws there are generally more authoritarian than I like and not nearly liberal enough, the rate of gun related homicides is also rather disturbing, so I really don't care.

Thats good news.

I'm Canadian, atheist, and think abortions should be privately funded and fully legal. I think America is actually less oppressive than Europe in many, but not all ways, and think USA is where I would rather live.

What did you dislike about Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts?

Was it the congestion? If so...I can kinda understand.

I can't say Ohio and congestion go together. I live there. I think you meant farm-filled bore-fest?

I'm a Deist, I beleive women have the right to an abortion, and I don't know if America is better than Europe:
1, I have never been to Europe, 2, America has less government intrusion into people's lives, but European nations don't spend their time legislating morality.

But then if you allow one, you must allow the other, because they go hand in hand; you cannot force someone to tell you that they are going hunting for food or vice versa. Too little distinction in the law.

Once you allow gun ownership for hunting, then you are also allowing it for self defense, due to the fact that if you own a gun for hunting you are going to use it for self defense anyways.
Meh, then people can hunt with bows and arrows. Gun ownership is generally a bad idea.

I can't say Ohio and congestion go together. I live there. I think you meant farm-filled bore-fest?
Yeah, I pretty much go there to visit my grandparents and that's more or less how I'd describe it. I mean, I made some trips to Cleveland and it's an alright place from what I've seen, though the science centre in Toronto is much better than the one there.

I am a proud Christian, pro-choice, and a North North American... not like... South North American. Europe is cooler, although i've never been there.

Meh, why not.

Christian (adhering predominantly to Calvinist theology), pro-life, pro-Switzerland.

Jewish and Catholic by heritage, however I am not religious and do not practice either. I am Pro-Choice, I live in the United States of America, and I prefer the United States of America over Europe.

Jews, Africans and especially Irish Catholics.



http://kathyddl.tripod.com/vanfairbtb.jpg



Get out of my country!

Atheist, pro-choice and European. And more or less happy with all three overall. There's still a lot to be improved about Europe on the whole, but socially, economically, culturally and generally I find it's by far the best place for me at this moment in time.

So, do I need to challenge somebody now?

Atheist, pro-choice and European. And more or less happy with all three overall. There's still a lot to be improved about Europe on the whole, but socially, economically, culturally and generally I find it's by far the best place for me at this moment in time.

So, do I need to challenge somebody now?

Me challenge me! du du du du du du dudu.

Christian, Pro Life, American.
Although Canada is very nice!

Me challenge me! du du du du du du dudu.

Ok, I challenge you.... to... erm.... to... a Scrabble match?

"European" is a large group, the Dutch are different from the Russians are different from the English... and so on and so on.

But I'll take the bait: I live in the U.S. practice a religion, and don't believe women have a right to an abortion. I don't completely disagree with keeping it legal, I just don't think it's a real right.

Ok, I challenge you.... to... erm.... to... a Scrabble match?

Ohhh not fair, wot with the dyslexcia and stuf, unless..... we can alow dyslexic speiling?

Atheist, Pro-Death (Kill the babies, but only if you're going to use all of the parts!), and Pro-Scandinavian. Never been a fan of France or Spain, Germany's decent these days, but England can eat my big Irish ass.

Meh, meh and "meh."

I am a pagan-leaning Unitarian Universalist, pro-choice and I'm an American. I like it a lot here, but I've loved Europe both times I've been.

Please state your religion (or absence of), your stance on abortion and whether you prefer the United States of America or Europe.

Example:

I am an atheist. I am pro-choice. I live in America and I like it better than Europe.
Atheist, prochoice, and believe the world extends beyond the land of the whiteskins. Asia, if I were allowed.

Atheist, prochoice, and believe the world extends beyond the land of the whiteskins. Asia, if I were allowed.

All of Asia?

All of Asia?
It's all derived from Chinese, except way out in a few of the islands. Mind you, China itself isn't that chinese anymore, not since the cultural revolution and the surrounding decades of culture bleaching by Emperor Mao.

If I had to pick 1 place... Maybe Taiwan, Hong Kong, Malaysia, or Singapore. I just wish they weren't so hot. Culturally though, they are perfect.

It's all derived from Chinese, except way out in a few of the islands. Mind you, China itself isn't that chinese anymore, not since the cultural revolution and the surrounding decades of culture bleaching by Emperor Mao.

If I had to pick 1 place... Maybe Taiwan, Hong Kong, Malaysia, or Singapore. I just wish they weren't so hot. Culturally though, they are perfect.

how about south korea?

i havent been there but it seems like its in a spot where the climate should be pretty good.

...And I'm rather tired of all this "Europe VS USA" bullshit...

Things were so much better when we could put nationality behind us but NOOOOO!

Some WHO SHALL NOT BE NAMED continue to this day to be asshats. Certain Americans perpetuate the "ignorant of the world" stereotype, and certain Europeans love to lord so-called superiority over the US.



Finally someone voices something.Evryone in these threads seems to America bash. Someone said they felt bad for Canada cause they were "in a bad neighborhood." But I don't apprieciate the "to hell with the rest of the world,USA forever,#1,only us!!" people either. Why can;t we all just get along?

It's all derived from Chinese, except way out in a few of the islands. Mind you, China itself isn't that chinese anymore, not since the cultural revolution and the surrounding decades of culture bleaching by Emperor Mao.

If I had to pick 1 place... Maybe Taiwan, Hong Kong, Malaysia, or Singapore. I just wish they weren't so hot. Culturally though, they are perfect.

Umm...last time I checked, India was in Asia. And no thanks, you can keep your Chinese culture.

It's all derived from Chinese, except way out in a few of the islands. Mind you, China itself isn't that chinese anymore, not since the cultural revolution and the surrounding decades of culture bleaching by Emperor Mao.

If I had to pick 1 place... Maybe Taiwan, Hong Kong, Malaysia, or Singapore. I just wish they weren't so hot. Culturally though, they are perfect.
I think that the Indians might disagree about everything in Asia being derived from the Chinese... or really anywhere west of India... or to the South... or even to the North of China, last I knew, the Mongolians had their own thing going and quite often attacked the Chinese way back when.

I am an atheist. I am pro-choice. I live in America and I like it better than Europe.