If war breaks out purely over religion should an Atheist refuse to fight even if your county requires it ?
Halfziem , I did not say what i believed in. Don’t jump to conclusions.
The atheists should have no more right to conscientious objection than any other citizen.
In a truly free country, I have the right to refuse to participate in an activity based on that activity violating my conscience due to my belief in the morality of that action.
When a government refuses to allow people to exercise their freedom of conscience, they violate Section 18 of the UN Declaration on Human Rights (1948).
That doesn’t actually stop governments from violating those rights though. It does make them accountable if they are charged in an international court eventually.
The US, UK, and Canada are as bad as any. Just look at the situation of doctors and pharmacists in these western democracies. They are being FORCED to violate their consciences to participate in activities that they believe are immoral, unethical, and sinful.
The certifying boards are using coercion to force compliance against the consciences of their members.
It has been suggested that a surgeon must perform at least 1 abortion as a requirement to obtain their license to practice. This is forcing a good and noble man to go against his conscience and murder a helpless infant in order to be accepted into the society of doctors.
Pharmacists opening pro-life pharmacies are being targeted by various culture-of-death activists for rights challenges. They claim a right to contracept, and abort, and thoes rights are more important than the right of conscience. I do see conscience as a right specifically protected, but I don’t see those other things stated anywhere in the UN Declaration.
That fact wouldn’t be a problem if condom makers, pill-dealers, and abortion corporations owned a few activist judges. Would it?
Does the promising healer make the blood sacrifice to be initiated into their ranks? Does the pharmacist help his customers to commit adultery, and kill children?
These are extreme and very public violations, yet no-one seems able to stop it. Is International law now void? Is the rule of law a thing of the past?
If people WITH beliefs cannot have their conscience rights honored and protected, why should people WITHOUT beliefs (atheists by definition) be protected?
And Jesus said unto them, Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s. And they marvelled greatly at him.
Should brothels be legalised in the UK?
what does everyone think..the government haven’t quite made up their mind yet…
OK first Divina, we in the dirty Vegas take offense. We style ourselves here in a very libertarian way, so long as it isn’t hurting anybody else, why make it illegal? We don’t really appreciate bible-thumping hillbillies judging our state. If that’s how you feel, stay in Mississippi (Sorry Reb). I am actually from Nevada and I’ll let you know a little secret. Legalizing brothels here has resulted in a dramatic decline in dead prostitutes, std transferred by prostitutes, arrests for illegal street-walking, arrests for illegal solicitation of prostitution and has all but put the pimps out of business. This doesn’t even mention that the women are now protected by employment laws and entitled to health insurance and the government gets to tax their earnings. In exchange, we now have advertisements for brothels. However, they are regulated by Constitutional regulations on Commercial Speech and can only be displayed in certain parts of the city. I think the “photographic pornography” is a small price to pay for virtual elimination of streetwalking and all the attached benefits. Long live Nevada! May the morality police never destroy my home.
ADD: Also, it seems that some of the other answerers don’t know the difference between a legalized brothel and legalized prostitution. Brothels are highly regulated businesses. Women aren’t “tortured by their pimps” because their are no pimps. High class brothels make their girls take drug tests too. So it would seem that these women are making a business decision when they choose to become “working girls.” In a good season at an expensive brothel, they can make half a million dollars. That’ll pay for some college huh?
Is Ahmadinejad the new Che Guevara?
The Iranian leader is heading to Latin America to form an anti-Bush alliance with Chavez and friends.
Will he succeed in bringing down the Evil American Empire?
Ahmadinejad cannot be the new Che Guevara because he neither believes in the workers’ struggle, affirms workers’ rights, nor is he leading a workers’ movement. Ahmadinejad is a reactionary medievalist who wants to impose the ridiculously primitive rule of sharia law upon all. We must oppose those who stand in the way of genuine progress. We must fight those who promote the totalitarianism of primitive dogma, irrational belief, and superstition. Just as the corporate model is the enemy of the people, we have to remain vigilant to the threat that arbitrators of morality represent. Religion threatens to silence the intelligence of all of us in exchange for our slavery to the ridiculous cosmic hobgoblin, god.
Use your minds. THINK for yourself. Authority must be challenged at every step; otherwise, it always asserts it supremacy over the individual will.
Smoking in cars?
I have just read that the Highway Code (UK) has changed and has introduced new codes of practice for driving. Does this mean that it would now be an offence to smoke in a car? I have to say that as a smoker I fail to see what it has to do with anyone else what I do in my own vehicle. I await the pure hatred that will no doubt be directed toward me by the anti-smokers who will place me somewhere between Hitler and Harold Shipman as the most evil person on the planet. Oh well, enjoy.
No hatred, sorry.
And being in the US, I’m not sure what the laws are doing there. Certainly in the US, the feeling has been that in “private” spaces (which would include your car), its OK to smoke.
I suppose you can imagine some politician thinking that smoking might be a distraction to the driver in that it occupies one hand (remember driver’s ed where they made a big deal about BOTH HANDS ON THE WHEEL?). However, that seems silly when you consider that eating is probably still legal and that is arguably far more dangerous (dealing with wrappers, spilling, etc)
However, at least in the US, it is illegal lfor a minor to smoke ANYWHERE. It is also illegal to smoke in the vicinity of a petrol pump (gee, why?).
I have to admit, if this really is happening, it seems draconian. I think smoking is an apalling habit and there should be all kinds of programs to prevent you from starting or helping you quit, and it should be illegal to smoke in a way that is dangerous to others, but this just smacks of legislating morality.
If they want to “go after” smoking, they should continue to make it more and more difficult to produce and market them. Now all they’re doing is picking on addicts.
For an atheist, what is the basis of right and wrong?
right and wrong
Morality and ethics are not dependent on religion. They are older than christianity, and the basis of our moral framework is hardwired into our DNA – even dogs have a sense of justice.
On top of this is layered our societal structures, laws and customs.
No religion required
Powered by Yahoo! Answers