![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
newnumber6Abortion?: I don't like it. However, I don't believe that, before the zygote/fetus/whatever has a functioning nervous system, that it's not morally wrong (I still don't like it). Afterwards, I think it should be legal and up to the mother's conscience until the point where the fetus could reasonably be expected to survive on its own if it was, say, born premature. After that, I think it should not be allowed except in cases where it's the life or health of the mother at stake (in which case, again, her choice). It certainly is a tricky and complicated issue, especially when you include all sorts of outlying issues related to the subject.
Death Penalty?: I am totally, 100% against the death penalty in all cases (I don't consider situations where a person is presenting a clear and present danger to someone else, and so is shot or something to prevent it, is a 'death penalty' case, and it's okay). Let's not misunderstand though.
I think there are people who deserve to die, who should die, and who I wouldn't be at all broken up about if some individual went and killed them (or find it in my heart to blame the killer).
I just think that the state should not be in the business of executing people. Life is one right the government shouldn't be able to determine for any of its citizens (aside from the previously mentioned clear and present dangers). It's prone to abuse, it's prone to mistakes, and it is irreversible. A person can be held accountable for murder, a state can't, and I'm sorry, but that's what I view a state-execution as, cold-blooded murder. A state certainly isn't emotional, it's deliberate and calculating, and the murder is planned well in advance. It's fairly reasonable to assume that if you put a prisoner in jail he can be kept there until his sentence is up (or indefinately, if life without parole is his sentence), exceptions notwithstanding, so there's no _need_ to kill them.
It doesn't seem to work as a deterrant from what I've heard, and I'm not sure it would make that much a difference if it did (public torture might be a deterrant too, but we've agreed not to do that because it's wrong). It can't teach them a lesson. All that's left as a reason for executing someone is public relations, and that's not good enough.
Incidentally though, I think that prisons should allow for anyone in them to request assisted suicide, with appropriate measures to make sure they aren't being coerced or whatnot. If a killer really is remorseful and wants to remove himself, great. Likewise if he can't face confinement and would rather just die. No need for us to pay for him then.
Prostitution?: I'm big on individual rights to do what they want if it doesn't harm another, so I think this should be legal. I don't advise it, of course, and I wouldn't really respect people who do it (which really, when you get down to it, includes porn stars and such), but it's their right, IMHO.
However, I would make 'pimping' (which I'd probably define as any arrangement where someone else gets more than 50% of the profits of prostitution in exchange for playing some role in arranging the dates or protecting the girls) completely illegal, punishable by a year or two in prison. It'd be considered a de-facto slavery arrangement in my book. If a 'pimp' is useful for protection, well they can make money in a bodyguard capacity, and maybe get a small percentage or a flat hourly fee.
Alcohol?: I don't drink at all, and I'm not really _too_ fond of drinking in general, but I don't really care if others do it (drinking to excess I kind of frown upon, but what you gonna do? Tell them they can't?).
Marijuana?: I think it should be as illegal as alcohol, but no more. I don't do it, don't recommend it, and don't really like when others do it, but I know many people who do it and I just live with it.
Other drugs?: Well, in general drugs are okay (from aspirin to medical ones, they're still drugs), but dependence on them I think is a weakness, and don't like it. For 'harder' drugs, I'm really mixed on whether they should be illegal or not. I think perhaps legal on a very limited in-patient basis, so that if you happen to be addicted to, say, heroin, you don't have to become a criminal to get your fix, and the criminal gets no benefit to addicting people to heroin, but you can't just walk into a drugstore and say, "Hey, I want some heroin."
Gay marriage?: I've never seen a particular problem with this. But then, I just don't 'get' religious opposition to it (I can understand them not supporting gays, but not the leap to 'they shouldn't be allowed this right'). I think that there should be fundamentally a way that they can have the same rights and responsibilities as a married couple. Whether this is called 'marriage', I'm not too worried about it.
I'm of the opinion that you can't legislate the language, so if you call it a 'civil union' but it is exactly the same in all respects, eventually everyone will probably be calling it a marriage anyway and it will be a difference which makes no difference (and, down the line, will eventually be eliminated even legally just to simplify things).
Illegal immigrants?: I don't really think about it. I don't really care if someone is an illegal immigrant so long as they're not committing any crimes (yes, I suppose by being an illegal immigrant they technically are, but I mean other ones). But then, I'm eventually going to form a One World Government anyway where there'll be no such thing as illegal immigrants.
Smoking?: Don't smoke, don't like it, but see Marijuana and Alcohol.
Drunk driving?: Yeah, this is pretty stupid. To some extent the alcohol can impair your judgement and make you think you're okay to drive, so mechanisms to help people come to the right decision (making bar owners responsible if they know a customer is drunk and driving, much better and cheaper public transportation, cars that can tell if you're drunk and so they won't drive, etc) are probably a good idea.
Cloning?: I'm not rabidly against it. So long as the rights of the clone are well-defined before hand (and the rights of the clonee... I think it should be illegal to make a clone of a living person without their consent), and the technical glitches are out of the way, I'm okay with it, but I don't think it's a good idea. Other uses like cloned tissue, cloned animals for some increasing breeding stock and such, perfectly fine, and I think research should continue.
Racism?: Stupid. Cultural problems are a little more of a thorny issue (and that _can_ occasionally be tied closely enough to race to seem like it's the same thing), but really, I just don't 'get' racism really.
Premarital sex?: I have no problem with it, but I think sex ideally should only come with a strong committment to that person. One night stands and the like are IMHO not very smart or honorable. But if you really love someone and plan to be with them for a while, and want to have sex even if you're not married? Great. Have fun. I think people tend to rush sex though.
Religion?: I'm personally, depending on your definition, either atheist or agnostic. I don't believe there's any gods, but I'm very open to the possibility I could be wrong in the general sense (that there might be some 'benevolent creative god'). Of the more specific cases of particular organized religions (like 'The God of the Bible is real'), I'm a lot more skeptical and have trouble buying it.
I could go into specific problems I have with it, but I won't.
That said, I always attempt to respect the religions of other people unless they're judging me for mine or doing something despicable in the name of it like denying the rights of others. I also know that for some people, their faith is a great source of personal strength and moral grounding. I just wish that the problems religions could be done away with.
The war in Iraq?: I think saying 'Okay, we're going to take the moral responsibility for removing horrible dictators from the world' is a potentially viable moral stance. But you have to a) be honest about that, rather than making up stories about Iraq being a threat to you, and b) you have to apply the stance consistantly, and to the whole world.
You can't invade countries to remove dictators you don't like while remaining allies to other people who are killing their own citizens in ways just as brutal, or attacking the dictators you perceive as 'easy' to wipe out while ignoring ones that might actually pose a threat to you. Well, you can do all that, but you can't and win my support.
The US going into it alone, without the support of the UN, sets a bad precedent though, as it removes their legitimacy. If other countries unilaterally invade, say, a neighbor, even if they claim to have a good reason for it, it's usually considered a wrong. 'But _we're_ the _good guys_, so it's okay' doesn't work, because not everyone agrees, and any country can claim it's the good guy.
Now that they're there though, I don't really know what to do. I suppose they have to see it through and try to make sure it doesn't just lead to a power vaccuum or revolution in another few years that puts people no better off.
On the other hand, a lot of the Iraqis seem to want them to go away, and it _is_ their country. So I don't know.
Bush?: Lick Bush in '04! ;) Sorry, just wanted to use that line. But really, I don't like him. With the exception of economic issues (which I might disagree from time to time and at most of the others I don't care), almost every policy decision of his that I'm made aware of is one I disagree with. Patriot Act, going to war in Iraq, Gay Marriage, Environmental, and so on.
There are a lot of little things that rub me the wrong way, there's a sense of smarmyness to him, the way he used to take really long vacations and that he said things like he wouldn't work past 6pm. Of course, there's the also the sense that he'd prefer to side with his religion over the law.
More fundamentally, I don't feel he's trustworthy at all. Especially since the Iraq situation, but even a little before, I suspect him and his administration about lying a lot more than even Clinton.
Downloading music?: I don't believe it's theft, first of all. I don't download music, of course, but I have on occasion downloaded things like TV shows, movies, or books, so I'll extend it a bit to them.
Anything I download I either have the intention of acquiring in a more legal way, or would have no intention of paying for no matter what. If I download a RPG book, it's because it's a lot easier to flip through the contents there and see if I like it than it is to do so in the store, or it's a book that someone in the RPG group already has and I'm essentially just keeping a 'local copy', but during the game we'd use the real one. There are movies I'd never ever pay to see, but I might have some casual interest in it. But if I actually _want_ to see a movie, I'll pay for it or not see it.
With TV shows, I think if it's something that's aired over regular TV, it's fair game. I might have taped it (hell, a lot of times I _do_ tape it.. I've got complete collections of a number of shows on video tape, taped off air), and it's usually just something either missed or have no access to here. They're offering it for free by that point. They might hope I watch the commercials, but I'm not stealing from them if I tape it and fast forward through them, or watch it live and leave the room during them. And if it's something I really love, I'll often want to buy the DVDs anyway.
Is it morally wrong? Probably, for the most part, but IMHO it's a wrong lower on the scale than, say, smoking in public, or saying a nasty thing to hurt somebody, and that gets done all the time. Maybe not even that, in some cases (In Canada, there's a legal surcharge on various 'blank media' like cassette tapes, blank CDs, etc, which basically is designed to compensate for their use in piracy.
But if there is that charge, then we _are_ in fact paying for the music pirated on them, we're just not paying the particular makers of that music directly, and instead paying the companies as a whole. So is it really wrong?)
The legal drinking age?: 18 I think is fair enough, but it doesn't really affect me so I don't care that much. I do think that with the supervision of parents, even younger than that is okay. The family tradition here was to allow kids to drink a little now and then while growing up, so they learn to respect it.
Porn?: I don't think there's anything terribly wrong with it, so long as all parties are consenting adults (or inanimate objects). As for watching it, I think it falls into the 'what someone does in the privacy of their own homes, if it doesn't hurt anybody, is nobody else's business' category. Now, watching porn while driving on a screen or projected onto the windshield, now that's kinda bad.
Suicide?: Again, a matter of pure personal choice. Voluntary euthanasia I think should be completely legal. Other than that, I think it's probably a bad idea and will likely hurt people you care about, so on that level is selfish but it is your choice. Psychological pain is probably as valid a reason as physical pain. Then again, I also believe suicide is one of the more likely ends to my own life (far, far down the line, when I have no close family left and no really close connections to others), so that may be a big reason I don't go more strongly into the whole 'it's a cowardly, selfish act' philosophy.
Spam?: I think I'd like to reconsider my stance on the Death Penalty. ;)
Death Penalty?: I am totally, 100% against the death penalty in all cases (I don't consider situations where a person is presenting a clear and present danger to someone else, and so is shot or something to prevent it, is a 'death penalty' case, and it's okay). Let's not misunderstand though.
I think there are people who deserve to die, who should die, and who I wouldn't be at all broken up about if some individual went and killed them (or find it in my heart to blame the killer).
I just think that the state should not be in the business of executing people. Life is one right the government shouldn't be able to determine for any of its citizens (aside from the previously mentioned clear and present dangers). It's prone to abuse, it's prone to mistakes, and it is irreversible. A person can be held accountable for murder, a state can't, and I'm sorry, but that's what I view a state-execution as, cold-blooded murder. A state certainly isn't emotional, it's deliberate and calculating, and the murder is planned well in advance. It's fairly reasonable to assume that if you put a prisoner in jail he can be kept there until his sentence is up (or indefinately, if life without parole is his sentence), exceptions notwithstanding, so there's no _need_ to kill them.
It doesn't seem to work as a deterrant from what I've heard, and I'm not sure it would make that much a difference if it did (public torture might be a deterrant too, but we've agreed not to do that because it's wrong). It can't teach them a lesson. All that's left as a reason for executing someone is public relations, and that's not good enough.
Incidentally though, I think that prisons should allow for anyone in them to request assisted suicide, with appropriate measures to make sure they aren't being coerced or whatnot. If a killer really is remorseful and wants to remove himself, great. Likewise if he can't face confinement and would rather just die. No need for us to pay for him then.
Prostitution?: I'm big on individual rights to do what they want if it doesn't harm another, so I think this should be legal. I don't advise it, of course, and I wouldn't really respect people who do it (which really, when you get down to it, includes porn stars and such), but it's their right, IMHO.
However, I would make 'pimping' (which I'd probably define as any arrangement where someone else gets more than 50% of the profits of prostitution in exchange for playing some role in arranging the dates or protecting the girls) completely illegal, punishable by a year or two in prison. It'd be considered a de-facto slavery arrangement in my book. If a 'pimp' is useful for protection, well they can make money in a bodyguard capacity, and maybe get a small percentage or a flat hourly fee.
Alcohol?: I don't drink at all, and I'm not really _too_ fond of drinking in general, but I don't really care if others do it (drinking to excess I kind of frown upon, but what you gonna do? Tell them they can't?).
Marijuana?: I think it should be as illegal as alcohol, but no more. I don't do it, don't recommend it, and don't really like when others do it, but I know many people who do it and I just live with it.
Other drugs?: Well, in general drugs are okay (from aspirin to medical ones, they're still drugs), but dependence on them I think is a weakness, and don't like it. For 'harder' drugs, I'm really mixed on whether they should be illegal or not. I think perhaps legal on a very limited in-patient basis, so that if you happen to be addicted to, say, heroin, you don't have to become a criminal to get your fix, and the criminal gets no benefit to addicting people to heroin, but you can't just walk into a drugstore and say, "Hey, I want some heroin."
Gay marriage?: I've never seen a particular problem with this. But then, I just don't 'get' religious opposition to it (I can understand them not supporting gays, but not the leap to 'they shouldn't be allowed this right'). I think that there should be fundamentally a way that they can have the same rights and responsibilities as a married couple. Whether this is called 'marriage', I'm not too worried about it.
I'm of the opinion that you can't legislate the language, so if you call it a 'civil union' but it is exactly the same in all respects, eventually everyone will probably be calling it a marriage anyway and it will be a difference which makes no difference (and, down the line, will eventually be eliminated even legally just to simplify things).
Illegal immigrants?: I don't really think about it. I don't really care if someone is an illegal immigrant so long as they're not committing any crimes (yes, I suppose by being an illegal immigrant they technically are, but I mean other ones). But then, I'm eventually going to form a One World Government anyway where there'll be no such thing as illegal immigrants.
Smoking?: Don't smoke, don't like it, but see Marijuana and Alcohol.
Drunk driving?: Yeah, this is pretty stupid. To some extent the alcohol can impair your judgement and make you think you're okay to drive, so mechanisms to help people come to the right decision (making bar owners responsible if they know a customer is drunk and driving, much better and cheaper public transportation, cars that can tell if you're drunk and so they won't drive, etc) are probably a good idea.
Cloning?: I'm not rabidly against it. So long as the rights of the clone are well-defined before hand (and the rights of the clonee... I think it should be illegal to make a clone of a living person without their consent), and the technical glitches are out of the way, I'm okay with it, but I don't think it's a good idea. Other uses like cloned tissue, cloned animals for some increasing breeding stock and such, perfectly fine, and I think research should continue.
Racism?: Stupid. Cultural problems are a little more of a thorny issue (and that _can_ occasionally be tied closely enough to race to seem like it's the same thing), but really, I just don't 'get' racism really.
Premarital sex?: I have no problem with it, but I think sex ideally should only come with a strong committment to that person. One night stands and the like are IMHO not very smart or honorable. But if you really love someone and plan to be with them for a while, and want to have sex even if you're not married? Great. Have fun. I think people tend to rush sex though.
Religion?: I'm personally, depending on your definition, either atheist or agnostic. I don't believe there's any gods, but I'm very open to the possibility I could be wrong in the general sense (that there might be some 'benevolent creative god'). Of the more specific cases of particular organized religions (like 'The God of the Bible is real'), I'm a lot more skeptical and have trouble buying it.
I could go into specific problems I have with it, but I won't.
That said, I always attempt to respect the religions of other people unless they're judging me for mine or doing something despicable in the name of it like denying the rights of others. I also know that for some people, their faith is a great source of personal strength and moral grounding. I just wish that the problems religions could be done away with.
The war in Iraq?: I think saying 'Okay, we're going to take the moral responsibility for removing horrible dictators from the world' is a potentially viable moral stance. But you have to a) be honest about that, rather than making up stories about Iraq being a threat to you, and b) you have to apply the stance consistantly, and to the whole world.
You can't invade countries to remove dictators you don't like while remaining allies to other people who are killing their own citizens in ways just as brutal, or attacking the dictators you perceive as 'easy' to wipe out while ignoring ones that might actually pose a threat to you. Well, you can do all that, but you can't and win my support.
The US going into it alone, without the support of the UN, sets a bad precedent though, as it removes their legitimacy. If other countries unilaterally invade, say, a neighbor, even if they claim to have a good reason for it, it's usually considered a wrong. 'But _we're_ the _good guys_, so it's okay' doesn't work, because not everyone agrees, and any country can claim it's the good guy.
Now that they're there though, I don't really know what to do. I suppose they have to see it through and try to make sure it doesn't just lead to a power vaccuum or revolution in another few years that puts people no better off.
On the other hand, a lot of the Iraqis seem to want them to go away, and it _is_ their country. So I don't know.
Bush?: Lick Bush in '04! ;) Sorry, just wanted to use that line. But really, I don't like him. With the exception of economic issues (which I might disagree from time to time and at most of the others I don't care), almost every policy decision of his that I'm made aware of is one I disagree with. Patriot Act, going to war in Iraq, Gay Marriage, Environmental, and so on.
There are a lot of little things that rub me the wrong way, there's a sense of smarmyness to him, the way he used to take really long vacations and that he said things like he wouldn't work past 6pm. Of course, there's the also the sense that he'd prefer to side with his religion over the law.
More fundamentally, I don't feel he's trustworthy at all. Especially since the Iraq situation, but even a little before, I suspect him and his administration about lying a lot more than even Clinton.
Downloading music?: I don't believe it's theft, first of all. I don't download music, of course, but I have on occasion downloaded things like TV shows, movies, or books, so I'll extend it a bit to them.
Anything I download I either have the intention of acquiring in a more legal way, or would have no intention of paying for no matter what. If I download a RPG book, it's because it's a lot easier to flip through the contents there and see if I like it than it is to do so in the store, or it's a book that someone in the RPG group already has and I'm essentially just keeping a 'local copy', but during the game we'd use the real one. There are movies I'd never ever pay to see, but I might have some casual interest in it. But if I actually _want_ to see a movie, I'll pay for it or not see it.
With TV shows, I think if it's something that's aired over regular TV, it's fair game. I might have taped it (hell, a lot of times I _do_ tape it.. I've got complete collections of a number of shows on video tape, taped off air), and it's usually just something either missed or have no access to here. They're offering it for free by that point. They might hope I watch the commercials, but I'm not stealing from them if I tape it and fast forward through them, or watch it live and leave the room during them. And if it's something I really love, I'll often want to buy the DVDs anyway.
Is it morally wrong? Probably, for the most part, but IMHO it's a wrong lower on the scale than, say, smoking in public, or saying a nasty thing to hurt somebody, and that gets done all the time. Maybe not even that, in some cases (In Canada, there's a legal surcharge on various 'blank media' like cassette tapes, blank CDs, etc, which basically is designed to compensate for their use in piracy.
But if there is that charge, then we _are_ in fact paying for the music pirated on them, we're just not paying the particular makers of that music directly, and instead paying the companies as a whole. So is it really wrong?)
The legal drinking age?: 18 I think is fair enough, but it doesn't really affect me so I don't care that much. I do think that with the supervision of parents, even younger than that is okay. The family tradition here was to allow kids to drink a little now and then while growing up, so they learn to respect it.
Porn?: I don't think there's anything terribly wrong with it, so long as all parties are consenting adults (or inanimate objects). As for watching it, I think it falls into the 'what someone does in the privacy of their own homes, if it doesn't hurt anybody, is nobody else's business' category. Now, watching porn while driving on a screen or projected onto the windshield, now that's kinda bad.
Suicide?: Again, a matter of pure personal choice. Voluntary euthanasia I think should be completely legal. Other than that, I think it's probably a bad idea and will likely hurt people you care about, so on that level is selfish but it is your choice. Psychological pain is probably as valid a reason as physical pain. Then again, I also believe suicide is one of the more likely ends to my own life (far, far down the line, when I have no close family left and no really close connections to others), so that may be a big reason I don't go more strongly into the whole 'it's a cowardly, selfish act' philosophy.
Spam?: I think I'd like to reconsider my stance on the Death Penalty. ;)
