Election: Morals and Values?

Linkat wrote:

Actually CoastalRat - both sides of the abortion issue believe killing (murder) a child is wrong. The difference is the belief of when human life begins. Since this is a moral belief and not a "proven" fact then it is wrong to force this belief on others.

And this is the crux of the abortion issue. When does human life begin? Science does not know. You and I do not know. And admittedly, people of faith do not know beyond all doubt. That said, I for one would rather err on the side of caution than on the other side. If life does begin at conception, then I would rather stand up for that life than take that life.

You say neither side wishes to kill a child. That's nice. So when is that tissue a child? You cannot say. Yet the pro-abortion crowd insists they know it is not a child until birth, otherwise partial birth abortions would be seen as illegal.

I did not mean to turn much of this thread into an abortion debate. Only to highlight one reason morals came into play in this election. I believe Kerry's position to be contradictory. Others do not. I respect that.

0 Replies

CoastalRat wrote:

Linkat wrote:
Actually CoastalRat - both sides of the abortion issue believe killing (murder) a child is wrong. The difference is the belief of when human life begins. Since this is a moral belief and not a "proven" fact then it is wrong to force this belief on others.

And this is the crux of the abortion issue. When does human life begin? Science does not know. You and I do not know. And admittedly, people of faith do not know beyond all doubt. That said, I for one would rather err on the side of caution than on the other side. If life does begin at conception, then I would rather stand up for that life than take that life.

You say neither side wishes to kill a child. That's nice. So when is that tissue a child? You cannot say. Yet the pro-abortion crowd insists they know it is not a child until birth, otherwise partial birth abortions would be seen as illegal.

I did not mean to turn much of this thread into an abortion debate. Only to highlight one reason morals came into play in this election. I believe Kerry's position to be contradictory. Others do not. I respect that.

But, if it's a moral belief, then what makes one standard the right one? It would then follow that rape and incest victims would have to give birth, failed birth control measures would necessitate fruition of the womb, the morning-after pill would become illegal... And if a woman smokes or comes in contact with a contaminate that harms her fetus she would/could be guilty of child abuse or murder...

And of course, once upon a time, the moral belief was that a man had the right to beat his wife or children, and there could be no such thing as marital rape... And of course interracial unions were all abominations... Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

Squinney makes a great point about red state vs. blue state morals, consider the following facts:

Seeing Mass is viewed as one of the most liberal states, I will use this as a blue state value. Massachusetts has one of the lowest teen pregnancy rates (number 6 overall). Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Dakota and Vermont are the only ones that have less. Of the highest ten,, 9 are southern (red) states! Texas rates 49th!

As far as lowest amount of unwed births, Mass. rates as 8th. Texas does much better here at 23rd. But of the 10 highest unwed mothers, 8 are southern (red) states!

As far as lowest divorce rates - Mass is number one with the lowest divorce rate. Texas comes in 38th. With 9 out of the 10 highest divorce rates occurring in southern states!

Lowest crime rate - Mass again is number one! Texas is 30, whereas 8 out of highest crime rate states are from the south (red)!

Basically in a study conducted by the CRC, most "moral/value" issues Massachusetts rated very high. Except for one category - number of drug induced deaths. As a matter of fact Mass is ranked 5th best state to raise a child. Of the worst 10, 9 are southern - red states.

The CDC also agrees with these findings, stating .."States with proporations of births to unmarried mothers higher than the national value can be found throughout the United States. However, some parts of the country, most notably the Southeast, stand out with most of the States in the region having relatively high proportions of births occurring to unmarried mothers." A chart of the US also reflects Mass as having the lowest percentage of unmarried births by State. Along with similar results of teenage pregnancies.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_19acc.pdf

0 Replies

Linkat wrote:

I look at voting for President almost like hiring an employee. We are basically hiring our President. Doesn't it make more sense to "hire" some one you feel is qualified best for the job rather than some one who shares your same moral values?

What if the person you were hiring demonstrated a tendency to bring their moral views, religious and otherwise, into the office, and to use them to make decisions on things like scientific research for the company?

0 Replies

Larry434 wrote:

Here's an idea.

The Dems would have a chance at winning an election IF they stop insulting the beliefs of the majority of voters and craft a campaign advocating what the majority believe.

The same could be said for the Republicans, and they had a candidate who did just that, John McCain. But the Conservative wing of the Republican party pushed their own choice for a candidate rather than the moderate candidate.

I guess the republicans did the right thing, since they won. Maybe the Dems need to move to the center more. I'm not sure which strategy is better, more center or more extreme, but I guess if you're losing (Dems), then you have to try something.

0 Replies

Larry434 wrote:

It's deceiving when you don't know the demographics of those small dots of blue -- they are usually the more densely populated areas.

That they are.

The common (and reasonable) rationale for this is that people in cities tend to need more government services and therefor don't mind paying for them (Dems). People in rural areas are much more self sufficient and tend not to want to waste taxes (repubs) paying for things they don't need (usually things in cities).