Re: Cloning, miscarriange, and the 1st
At 08:22 AM 7/3/2001 -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
The fact is that if clonning research is stopped then the low success rate will continue. A self-fulfilling prophecy. If it is allowed to go forward in a very short time (a year perhaps) the problems will be ironed out and the success rate will exceed 'natural' (Grrrr Judeo-Christian ethics) rates of success.
Eugenics - the management of reproductive choice by the state.
What we need to do is outlaw the imposition of religious and political viewpoints from the discussion....wait....
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The problem with this argument is that despite the apparent religious agnosticism of the 1st, the moral basis upon which the SC has interpreted our laws is Judeo-Christian. Historically you've been protected from government intrusion unless your religion offends too many powerful people or presents political challenges. Consider the Mormons and shamanic drug rituals of the native Americans. Didn't Mao say something about all politics being, eventually, dispensed from the end of gun? steve
On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Steve Schear wrote:
The problem with this argument is that despite the apparent religious agnosticism of the 1st, the moral basis upon which the SC has interpreted our laws is Judeo-Christian. Historically you've been protected from government intrusion unless your religion offends too many powerful people or presents political challenges. Consider the Mormons and shamanic drug rituals of the native Americans. Didn't Mao say something about all politics being, eventually, dispensed from the end of gun?
Simple proof that my point is valid. -- ____________________________________________________________________ Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. Ludwig Wittgenstein The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
One other point...
On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Steve Schear wrote:
The problem with this argument is that despite the apparent religious agnosticism of the 1st, the moral basis upon which the SC has interpreted our laws is Judeo-Christian. Historically you've been protected from
Not 'protected' but 'granted at the King's behest'. -- ____________________________________________________________________ Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. Ludwig Wittgenstein The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
And not even really Judeo, just rednecked Christian. Ancient Judaism was polygamous, as anyone who can read the Old Testament knows. And it wasn't just the "shamanic drug rituals" of native americans that was banned -- *ALL* religious practices were banned for many decades. Many indigenous people were killed simply for engaging in religious dancing -- Sun Dance and Ghost Dance in particular, but all other spiritual worship was banned as well. Not only native americans, but many others are banned from practicing their religion -- Hindu and Rastafarian use of ganga, for example. Santeria, Vodun, and like african/earth based religions are regularly persecuted, likewise Wicca and Druidism. Don't even mention Satanism. None of the last few mentioned are allowed on military bases, for example, and Dubbya, asked about this during the campaign, said they weren't "real" religions. Police raid ceremonies in many localities. How anyone can actually believe that we have any semblance of "freedom of religion" in the US is mind boggling. Well, I guess the same can be said for any belief we have a constitutional government at all, or have had for a long, long time. Steve Schear wrote:
At 08:22 AM 7/3/2001 -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The problem with this argument is that despite the apparent religious agnosticism of the 1st, the moral basis upon which the SC has interpreted our laws is Judeo-Christian. Historically you've been protected from government intrusion unless your religion offends too many powerful people or presents political challenges. Consider the Mormons and shamanic drug rituals of the native Americans. Didn't Mao say something about all politics being, eventually, dispensed from the end of gun?
-- Harmon Seaver, MLIS CyberShamanix Work 920-203-9633 hseaver@cybershamanix.com Home 920-233-5820 hseaver@ameritech.net
On Wed, 4 Jul 2001, Harmon Seaver wrote:
How anyone can actually believe that we have any semblance of "freedom of religion" in the US is mind boggling. Well, I guess the same can be said for any belief we have a constitutional government at all, or have had for a long, long time.
March 4, 1861. -- ____________________________________________________________________ Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. Ludwig Wittgenstein The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
participants (3)
-
Harmon Seaver -
Jim Choate -
Steve Schear