What do I think of...
Abortion?: I have no objection to early abortions. I don't see (beyoned unnecessary sophistry) the difference between preventing a pair of zygotes from meeting (barrier contraception), stopping the resultant pair from implanting (morning after pill, etc...), and removing a pea-sized blob or random cells. I also think that arguments that barrier contraception is 'preventing life that God destined to happen' or similar are ridiculous, since failure to be having sex at any given moment is having a similar effect. (See premarital sex for further discussion). Later abortions (such as the ones picked out by anti-abortionists) are certainly best avoided for medical reasons, and I agree with the hard limit beyond which it is illegal to abort (it roughly corresponds with the earliest feasible survival of premature birth, I think).
Death Penalty?: It's permenant. People a) make mistakes, and b) change. No.
Prostitution?: If there were some way of annihilting the effective slavery of many prostitutes, then I'd be all in favour. Legalisation (and regulation) seems the only good one, to me. I find the idea of engaging in it myself (from either end) repugnant, but if there are willing buyers and sellers, I am not about to intefere.
Alcohol?: A quandry. I like mild quantities of alcohol myself, and have even been known to get rather tipsy - but not, I think, particularly offensively. I also actively dislike violent and abusive drunks spilling onto the streets at 11, and having to deal with them. I wouldn't mind much if it just went away, but am otherwise in favour of extensive mind-control and psycological conditioning programs, to make everyone agree with me.
Marijuana?: I'd likely have smoked some at some point, if it weren't frequently mixed with tobacco. Since then, I tend to avoid it - mostly as a matter of (rather frivolous, and double-standard laden) personal honour. I have no problem with others smoking it. (See also: Drunk driving). Should be legal, and have never been criminalized (around 1900, I believe). Telling a third or so of the youth population that they are crimilans, when they 'know' they have done nothing wrong, takes away the sting of the label, rather - which can't help.
Other drugs?: Trickier. I'm generally of the opinion that people should be able to screw themselves up however they want - but ought to get a decent warning first. Frankly, the present 'system' does that quite nicely. I'm honestly not sure how (if) the law should be changed, and would want to see the results of the impending change in the marijuana laws, first. (If they don't change the law, but instead stop enforcing it, that's probably the same - and one or the other is looming large on the horizon).
Gay marriage?: The legal registration thereof should be instated tomorrow. Individual ministers of various religions (or, of course, the leadership of said religions, if they are of an authoritarian bent) should then be able to make their own decisions; as should the owners of relevant buildings. People who want to maintain the 'sanctity' of marriage are quite welocome to pick a different term that excludes gays, blacks, the poor, the disabled, and those who had premarital sex, or drive the wrong make of car, and use it to describe themselves. I will likely never use the word without sarcasm on my mind.
Illegal immigrants?: Breaking the law? Dead easy. Immigration is laden with bureacracy, and if you don't speak the language, it's easy to get lost. (Frankly, it's easy if you do). Those who came here, fully intending to freeload, and do nothing else? Sure, keep em out. Those who want to work, but aren't allowed? Erm... why not? This appllies to those with good reasons to leave home. Economic migration obviously needs to be kept under control, or our precious way of life will be disrupted, but given our shortage of skilled plumbers, doctors, builders and so forth, that makes for a large minority who we can welcome safely.
The issue also makes a very bad political football, and I wish it were not used as such. Impoverishing people to obtain the conservative vote is right out.
Smoking?: I would happily see it eliminated, at least from anywhere I ever have, or want, to go. As with other drugs, people are welcome to do anything they like, so long as it doesn't cause me significant inconvenience.
Drunk driving?: Personally, I've never touched alcohol when thinking of driving the same day. I see is as deeply wrong to endanger others by driving while unfit. This includes other drugs use. And mobile phones. In fairness, I've driven while moderatly tired, before - but never alone in a car, and I do stop to take breaks when doing so (and, these days, go to lengths to avoid it as much as I can).
Cloning?: Useful, and with many medical applications. Cloning as a means of producing children, on a large scale, has long-term genetic implications, as well as societal ones, and so should only be allowed for valid medical reasons. (I've seen a few suggested - bone marrow donors, etc. All were unusual.)
Racism?: My first serious girlfriend was half-carribean, and I have numerous friends with interesting skin colours, so I would say not. That said, I do sometimes feel cultural differences quite keenly - but mostly in the group membership/exclusion sense, and no worse than I might feel when dealing with a drinking society I was sat near at a formal. In general, I applaud the general aims of the stance being taken against it, but deplore the specifics. I explicitly dislike unplesant things happening to public figures who tell racist jokes in private. (There is the argument that casual acceptance of such indicates or leads to acceptance of the implicit attitude, but I think that humour is a good deal less aligned with our views than that. Especially given our ability to laugh at ourselves.)
Premarital sex?: I see nothing sacred in the act of penetration. (This, I think, is a view that's shifted a little in the last 12 months) - merely another step on a sliding scale. Okay, so it's easy to deliniate, and it's about as far as it's possible to get without consent (i.e. rape), but that's about it. I think physical affection, in whatever form, can be a factor in painful relationship problems - but I think the physical affection is more symptomatic of the attachment and affection that cause the problems. Platonic relationships can cause just as much suffering, so I see it as wrong to blame sex.
That said, I wish it wasn't held in quite such esteem by society, and the media (I wonder which drives which). The insecurities that engenders are rather damaging.
So, to answer the question, I cannot accept the validity of arguiments based on religion or procreation, and am left wth the proposition that you must tell the government before you go beyond a certain degree of physical affection - which just seems wrong.
Religion?: I'm probably a 'strong agnostic'. I accept that we cannot now the answer, but believe on balance that the atheist position is probably correct. I try to keep an open and inquisitove mind, but now believe that I will not believe in an interventionist creator without strong evidence of such intervention. Other people are welcome to do as they wish, so long as it does not cause significant inconvenience to myself (or non-consenting others).
The war in Iraq?: A bad idea, an option they tried before better ones were explored, and something we were dragged into, in a nasty piece of political manauvering. Ultimately, it was probably better to finish what they started, once it had begun, but now we'll see why it really shouldn't have been. Northern Ireland is going to prove to be a lesson poorly learned, I suspect.
Bush?: The man must, MUST, be better than he appears. I simply fail to see how he could have been the best choice from almost ANY group of people, never mind 260 million of them, given how he comes across. Therefore, I must assume that my information is fatally corrupted, and that I cannot form a useful opinion.
Downloading music?: It's just more convenient than obeying the law. The fact that it's cheaper is a contributing factor, but now the 'free' culture has become ingrained, that means of distribution will probably never be fully reclaimed. I haven't in a couple of years, but I feel no guilt over having done so.
Oh, I have done, but nothing that was lisenced for sale in this country. (DVDs are worse - they actively try to prevent you from buying them from other parts of the world, and criminalise circumventing these means in various trivial fashions (incidentally paying the company...) - given which, I don't feel guilty about dabbling in the whole 'fansub' anime community. That said, the success of the above seems to be killing it, as the companies start releasing such series' faster, and in larger quantities - the justification for the movement (within anime) will probably be dead in five years, although it'll likely carry on, in a similar form to the current music downloading 'network'.)
The legal drinking age?: Criminalising large chunks of the population is silly. My social group started drinking occasionally at 15, and we were in no way exceptional in that regard. That said, I don't think I started enjoying drinking except as a necessary part of the 'party experience' until I was 20. Reducing it to 16 seems to me a better alternative to making large numbers of 16-18 years olds criminals, but showing them that being a criminal isn't a problem, and nobody will catch you, or care.
Porn?: If you want to, sure. Why not? The concept held a brief fascination when I was about 14, and it was forbidden, and hence exciting - but the reality has left me entirely ambivalent, personally. Making it... well, it should be sonsensual. (Which, incidentally, is pretty much my only moral objection to the viewing of child porn - that doing so encourages the making of more - which is unlikely to be consensual. Oh, and by 'child porn' I don't mean 'under the age of consent' (since I'm perfectly prepared to believe you'll find consenting 12 year olds), but pre-pubescent. The original meaning of paedophilia, before it was hijacked as a rallying point for a newspaper sales campaign.)
Suicide?: I've never seriosuly considered it, and doubt I would without some really serious external circumstances (impending torture to the slow and painful death, for example). I have difficulty empathising with the view that it's the best thing to do, and tend to see it as something done on a mood swing, or a random dip. (Yes, I know this is probably wrong, but it's still how I see it, subconsciously) Thus, I tend to think that people shouldn't do it, and things (or, at least, their happiness) will improve. I suppose it comes down to 'do it if you really must. I don't think it's morally wrong; but I do think you're making the biggest possible mistake.'
I see life as self-contained, with no greater purpose than obtaining satisfaction, happiness, and enjoyment. (I don't see that this leads to anarchy, or despair, except by flawed logic).
Death Penalty?: It's permenant. People a) make mistakes, and b) change. No.
Prostitution?: If there were some way of annihilting the effective slavery of many prostitutes, then I'd be all in favour. Legalisation (and regulation) seems the only good one, to me. I find the idea of engaging in it myself (from either end) repugnant, but if there are willing buyers and sellers, I am not about to intefere.
Alcohol?: A quandry. I like mild quantities of alcohol myself, and have even been known to get rather tipsy - but not, I think, particularly offensively. I also actively dislike violent and abusive drunks spilling onto the streets at 11, and having to deal with them. I wouldn't mind much if it just went away, but am otherwise in favour of extensive mind-control and psycological conditioning programs, to make everyone agree with me.
Marijuana?: I'd likely have smoked some at some point, if it weren't frequently mixed with tobacco. Since then, I tend to avoid it - mostly as a matter of (rather frivolous, and double-standard laden) personal honour. I have no problem with others smoking it. (See also: Drunk driving). Should be legal, and have never been criminalized (around 1900, I believe). Telling a third or so of the youth population that they are crimilans, when they 'know' they have done nothing wrong, takes away the sting of the label, rather - which can't help.
Other drugs?: Trickier. I'm generally of the opinion that people should be able to screw themselves up however they want - but ought to get a decent warning first. Frankly, the present 'system' does that quite nicely. I'm honestly not sure how (if) the law should be changed, and would want to see the results of the impending change in the marijuana laws, first. (If they don't change the law, but instead stop enforcing it, that's probably the same - and one or the other is looming large on the horizon).
Gay marriage?: The legal registration thereof should be instated tomorrow. Individual ministers of various religions (or, of course, the leadership of said religions, if they are of an authoritarian bent) should then be able to make their own decisions; as should the owners of relevant buildings. People who want to maintain the 'sanctity' of marriage are quite welocome to pick a different term that excludes gays, blacks, the poor, the disabled, and those who had premarital sex, or drive the wrong make of car, and use it to describe themselves. I will likely never use the word without sarcasm on my mind.
Illegal immigrants?: Breaking the law? Dead easy. Immigration is laden with bureacracy, and if you don't speak the language, it's easy to get lost. (Frankly, it's easy if you do). Those who came here, fully intending to freeload, and do nothing else? Sure, keep em out. Those who want to work, but aren't allowed? Erm... why not? This appllies to those with good reasons to leave home. Economic migration obviously needs to be kept under control, or our precious way of life will be disrupted, but given our shortage of skilled plumbers, doctors, builders and so forth, that makes for a large minority who we can welcome safely.
The issue also makes a very bad political football, and I wish it were not used as such. Impoverishing people to obtain the conservative vote is right out.
Smoking?: I would happily see it eliminated, at least from anywhere I ever have, or want, to go. As with other drugs, people are welcome to do anything they like, so long as it doesn't cause me significant inconvenience.
Drunk driving?: Personally, I've never touched alcohol when thinking of driving the same day. I see is as deeply wrong to endanger others by driving while unfit. This includes other drugs use. And mobile phones. In fairness, I've driven while moderatly tired, before - but never alone in a car, and I do stop to take breaks when doing so (and, these days, go to lengths to avoid it as much as I can).
Cloning?: Useful, and with many medical applications. Cloning as a means of producing children, on a large scale, has long-term genetic implications, as well as societal ones, and so should only be allowed for valid medical reasons. (I've seen a few suggested - bone marrow donors, etc. All were unusual.)
Racism?: My first serious girlfriend was half-carribean, and I have numerous friends with interesting skin colours, so I would say not. That said, I do sometimes feel cultural differences quite keenly - but mostly in the group membership/exclusion sense, and no worse than I might feel when dealing with a drinking society I was sat near at a formal. In general, I applaud the general aims of the stance being taken against it, but deplore the specifics. I explicitly dislike unplesant things happening to public figures who tell racist jokes in private. (There is the argument that casual acceptance of such indicates or leads to acceptance of the implicit attitude, but I think that humour is a good deal less aligned with our views than that. Especially given our ability to laugh at ourselves.)
Premarital sex?: I see nothing sacred in the act of penetration. (This, I think, is a view that's shifted a little in the last 12 months) - merely another step on a sliding scale. Okay, so it's easy to deliniate, and it's about as far as it's possible to get without consent (i.e. rape), but that's about it. I think physical affection, in whatever form, can be a factor in painful relationship problems - but I think the physical affection is more symptomatic of the attachment and affection that cause the problems. Platonic relationships can cause just as much suffering, so I see it as wrong to blame sex.
That said, I wish it wasn't held in quite such esteem by society, and the media (I wonder which drives which). The insecurities that engenders are rather damaging.
So, to answer the question, I cannot accept the validity of arguiments based on religion or procreation, and am left wth the proposition that you must tell the government before you go beyond a certain degree of physical affection - which just seems wrong.
Religion?: I'm probably a 'strong agnostic'. I accept that we cannot now the answer, but believe on balance that the atheist position is probably correct. I try to keep an open and inquisitove mind, but now believe that I will not believe in an interventionist creator without strong evidence of such intervention. Other people are welcome to do as they wish, so long as it does not cause significant inconvenience to myself (or non-consenting others).
The war in Iraq?: A bad idea, an option they tried before better ones were explored, and something we were dragged into, in a nasty piece of political manauvering. Ultimately, it was probably better to finish what they started, once it had begun, but now we'll see why it really shouldn't have been. Northern Ireland is going to prove to be a lesson poorly learned, I suspect.
Bush?: The man must, MUST, be better than he appears. I simply fail to see how he could have been the best choice from almost ANY group of people, never mind 260 million of them, given how he comes across. Therefore, I must assume that my information is fatally corrupted, and that I cannot form a useful opinion.
Downloading music?: It's just more convenient than obeying the law. The fact that it's cheaper is a contributing factor, but now the 'free' culture has become ingrained, that means of distribution will probably never be fully reclaimed. I haven't in a couple of years, but I feel no guilt over having done so.
Oh, I have done, but nothing that was lisenced for sale in this country. (DVDs are worse - they actively try to prevent you from buying them from other parts of the world, and criminalise circumventing these means in various trivial fashions (incidentally paying the company...) - given which, I don't feel guilty about dabbling in the whole 'fansub' anime community. That said, the success of the above seems to be killing it, as the companies start releasing such series' faster, and in larger quantities - the justification for the movement (within anime) will probably be dead in five years, although it'll likely carry on, in a similar form to the current music downloading 'network'.)
The legal drinking age?: Criminalising large chunks of the population is silly. My social group started drinking occasionally at 15, and we were in no way exceptional in that regard. That said, I don't think I started enjoying drinking except as a necessary part of the 'party experience' until I was 20. Reducing it to 16 seems to me a better alternative to making large numbers of 16-18 years olds criminals, but showing them that being a criminal isn't a problem, and nobody will catch you, or care.
Porn?: If you want to, sure. Why not? The concept held a brief fascination when I was about 14, and it was forbidden, and hence exciting - but the reality has left me entirely ambivalent, personally. Making it... well, it should be sonsensual. (Which, incidentally, is pretty much my only moral objection to the viewing of child porn - that doing so encourages the making of more - which is unlikely to be consensual. Oh, and by 'child porn' I don't mean 'under the age of consent' (since I'm perfectly prepared to believe you'll find consenting 12 year olds), but pre-pubescent. The original meaning of paedophilia, before it was hijacked as a rallying point for a newspaper sales campaign.)
Suicide?: I've never seriosuly considered it, and doubt I would without some really serious external circumstances (impending torture to the slow and painful death, for example). I have difficulty empathising with the view that it's the best thing to do, and tend to see it as something done on a mood swing, or a random dip. (Yes, I know this is probably wrong, but it's still how I see it, subconsciously) Thus, I tend to think that people shouldn't do it, and things (or, at least, their happiness) will improve. I suppose it comes down to 'do it if you really must. I don't think it's morally wrong; but I do think you're making the biggest possible mistake.'
I see life as self-contained, with no greater purpose than obtaining satisfaction, happiness, and enjoyment. (I don't see that this leads to anarchy, or despair, except by flawed logic).