[stratos]

$1:

And totally off-topic but in reponse to TatoodGirl's post, I am SO glad I was circumsised! I dont think having to clean 'dick cheese' out of my foreskin every day would be a valuable use of my time.

[Zipperfish]

stratos stratos:

yes these are serious issues and are portested and voted on and debated constantly in almost every western nation.

Yet exactly how do you equate these to targeting kids for attack as part of the talibans war aims. How does training kids to blow up a group of ppl with a bomb straped to your waist at the age of 10 even remotely justified by your examples of whats wrong in Canada.

Once again I'll ask how does the actions of the Taliban make them the same as me?

So you consider it immoral for a culture to tolerate the training of a 10 year-old to conduct terrorist operations. But you consider it moral for a culture to allow the deliberate extermination unborn babies at the whim of the mother. Which is worse? Well, I guess we could go with that one for a while.

Morals are relative. They change often, albeit slowly. They can, and are, argued at length, and there is no real yardstick for valuing one over another, apart from judging them from the particular moral mindset you were inculcated with from birth.

Interests, on the other hands, are quantifiable, rational.

So, to be clear and to state yet again, I am not equating Taliban morals with Canadian morals, I am dismissing the moral argument as useless, vague, mutable and unwinnable.

I am saying that our interests should be paramount.

[stratos]

$1:

So you consider it immoral for a culture to tolerate the training of a 10 year-old to conduct terrorist operations. But you consider it moral for a culture to allow the deliberate extermination unborn babies at the whim of the mother. Which is worse?

Who said I feel its ok, i've voiced my decent against abortion except in certin cases. Rape and danger to the mothers life for example. So exactly how do you equate a person making the choice of abotion as the same as brain washing someone to blow them selfs and as many ppl up as they can in a market?

$1:

So, to be clear and to state yet again, I am not equating Taliban morals with Canadian morals, I am dismissing the moral argument as useless, vague, mutable and unwinnable.

So your saying that your whole debate with me is unwinnable, thank you. My main point was that by their actions they have shown themselfs not to be like me wich was stated by another poster earlier. You used the examples I set forth as grounds to argue morals and admited that its an unwinnable argument so why go that route in the first place?

Once again and for the final time please show me where their actions show them to be the same as me? No one has as of yet.

[PENATRATOR]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

My point is that we have our own higher moral standards so the argument of "but they would have done this to us" is totally irrelevant.

Find a post where I have ever used that argument

[Zipperfish]

stratos stratos:

Who said I feel its ok, i've voiced my decent against abortion except in certin cases. Rape and danger to the mothers life for example. So exactly how do you equate a person making the choice of abotion as the same as brain washing someone to blow them selfs and as many ppl up as they can in a market?

I didn't ask if you "feel its OK." I said you allow it to happen. You tolerate the termination of millions of unborn children every year in the US, correct?

To someone who believed an unborn child was a human being, and therefore deserving of rights generally accorded human beings, what is the difference between your toleration of this practice and someone else tolerating the use of the occasional child for a suicide bomber? In comparison, they might consider you the more immoral.

I'm not making the argument one way or the other. I could use a myriad other moral dilemmas besides abortion. I'm just demonstrating the mutability of morals.

$1:

So your saying that your whole debate with me is unwinnable, thank you. My main point was that by their actions they have shown themselfs not to be like me wich was stated by another poster earlier. You used the examples I set forth as grounds to argue morals and admited that its an unwinnable argument so why go that route in the first place?

No I'm saying: "So, to be clear and to state yet again, I am not equating Taliban morals with Canadian morals, I am dismissing the moral argument as useless, vague, mutable and unwinnable."

I want to judge our nation's involvement in Afghanistan based on facts, not feelings.

[Akhenaten]

$1:

I said you allow it to happen. You tolerate the termination of millions of unborn children every year in the US, correct?

Is that really justifiable considering it's nowhere near within his power to stop it?

[Zipperfish]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

$1:

I said you allow it to happen. You tolerate the termination of millions of unborn children every year in the US, correct?

Is that really justifiable considering it's nowhere near within his power to stop it?

Someone who considered abortion murder could use violence. That's what we're doing with the Taliban, right?

If:
(a) you support the use of force against the Taliban because they are immoral (they use ten year-olds as bombs, etc), and
(b) you consider it murder to deliberately terminate a human embryo

Then does it not follow on moral principles that (c) you support the use of force against those that do abortions?

Or perhaps our hypothetical person values democracy and argues that since we are a democracy, and we arrived at this decision to legalize abortion civilly, he will tolerate it. By that reasoning then, should Afghanistan's law to allow spousal rape be tolerated by Afghanis?

Another moral quagmire. So again--and back to my original point--let's base our involvement in Afghanistan on our national interests, not morals.

[stratos]

$1:

I didn't ask if you "feel its OK." I said you allow it to happen. You tolerate the termination of millions of unborn children every year in the US, correct?

To someone who believed an unborn child was a human being, and therefore deserving of rights generally accorded human beings, what is the difference between your toleration of this practice and someone else tolerating the use of the occasional child for a suicide bomber? In comparison, they might consider you the more immoral.

I do not tolerate it I vote aginst it every time I can but at the same time I don't go blowing up abortion clinics to get my point across. But tell me how a legal procedure that is done by choice of the mother is moraly the same as straping a bomb onto a kid and sending them into a crowd?

$1:

No I'm saying: "So, to be clear and to state yet again, I am not equating Taliban morals with Canadian morals, I am dismissing the moral argument as useless, vague, mutable and unwinnable."

I want to judge our nation's involvement in Afghanistan based on facts, not feelings.

Then why have you not challanged me on my other part of my statement. I pointed out facts of what the taliban was doing. My whole comment about the way the taliban is wageing its war shows that they are not like me. This was in response to another poster saying they were. Your the one who started in on the moral issue for some unknown reason.

[Gunnair]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

We likely wouldn't have heard anything about it if the Taliban had done this to one of ours. Or if we did it would be the sounds of them cheering, singing and shouting 'Allahu Akbar!', as they danced around the body they were about to desecrate.

If the Taliban had killed a mortally wounded soldier, would it have been considered a mercy killing?

Goes both ways here , Shep.