If you believe fetuses are people, I sure hope you will impose that belief on others and try to prevent people from killing fetuses. If you refuse to impose this belief on others, you probably don't believe it very strongly. Mr. Ryan has every right to want to impose his beliefs on others, as long as he lets us know so that those who don't share those beliefs won't vote for him. Mr. Biden is clearly less catholic, so obviously he has my support. Bottom line: This is why it's necessary to question politicians on their religious beliefs. Keeping religious beliefs "separate" is not reasonable or beneficial. All beliefs should be subjected to the same critical analysis. And as long as I'm rambling, I'll throw in that religious organizations should pay taxes. I feel like that's related somehow. I would write a more well-constructed post, but I don't have time for that shit right now. Anyway, here's an interesting article: http://newhumanist.org.uk/2823/down-with-secularism. Enjoy!
Edit: Turns out abortion is a bad example. Is personhood of the fetus relevant? I always thought it was, but after reading this blog, reading a few of the 400+ comments, adding my 2 cents, being called a "fuckwitt," and reading some more of the comments, I'm starting to understand why it may not be.
Under what Constitutional pretext should religious institutions pay taxes, and how would these taxes be calculated and collected? NPOs do not pay taxes, or should the Red Cross start ponying up based on the value of the blood they collect on the black market?
ReplyDeleteThe Red Cross Collects blood on the black market?
DeleteAnyway, I don't remember what made me think of that, I don't actually understand taxes, and I have to study, so I'll let you win that one, anonymous person, unless another reader wants to comment.