Anyone intelligent enough who reads this thread is going to understand what Fatihah doesn't. If he hasn't gotten it by now I doubt he ever will. Don't feed the troll.
Peace,
The term dominate is a relative perspective. If you mean the top of the food chain sure, there would always be a dominate species, but everything is linked and relies on each other so nothing is truly dominate, relatively yes but abosolutly no.
This is wrong,
Archdiocese defends decision to deny children because of lesbian parents - CNN.com
The Archdiocese already gave an explanation why, and it was about the churches belief about marriage.
The rest of what you have said is opinion about the way you think it should be, which is fine...
You have to remember while trying to maintain the separation of church and state the state still needs to allow a way in which people can share their beliefs without the government telling them how, whether that be a religion of Islam, Buddhism, Christianity or even if some atheists want to pull...
You assume all churches are business or are as wealthy as the catholic church. Surely you can see how a church would fall under the same classification as a charitable organization. Hell anything that is for a community that is not for profit can fall within this bracket. And all...
No, it isn't about that at all.
It is impossible for the state to be completely uninvolved with religion. What I do believe is that the state needs to allow a place for religion to exist in its society and allow the religion to practice its beliefs freely no matter what the religion or the...
I very much agree with you on this, if a private organization accepts public funding it would have to fallow discrimination laws. A person paying taxes shouldn't be exempt from that which they finance. However, all non-profit organizations are allowed tax exempt and tax deductions are on a per...
Not going to respond to tree posting, as I don't have the kind of time to waste explaining all the different ways you can take something.
I think it is fair to say that the law has to have the ability to work and change with the challenges that faces its society. Religion for a long time has...
Your answer is relative to the way we the people view religion and its place in our society. I'll agree though that this perspective can change and perhaps this is the reason we are seeing this in the news. Ideally it would be nice to ban discrimination like we do murder, maybe someday we will...
You know this is was for re-enrolment for a private school and not a daycare facility right? This is not new, churches or private schools ran by churches do not fall under the same discrimination laws that normal businesses do for obvious reasons. Not that I agree with them, myself I think the...
In my opinion its circumstantial, cases like insest rape or heath concerns. While everyone I think should have a chance at life there are exceptions in favour of pro-choice where the pluses out weigh the minuses.
My father told me something when I was a kid about being a man, he said a boy when...
Yes its how we are viewing the question that is leading to our different perspectives. It may be that you have no reserves about simply touching someone and my find it silly that someone would ask such a thing, as do I, but no more silly than asking a question that is common sense and everyone...
This! What ever happened to people thinking for themselves and voting accordingly. In my opinion affiliations, like religion, is just another way for someone else to think for you.
But your answer isn't generic, you are assuming she doesn't want to be touched adding to the question, and that is not the question. Otherwise the op could ask; Is it immoral to touch a person that doesn't want you to? The question singled out strippers in a religious forum where stripping is...
I don't think it is immoral. I think it is wrong because of social convention and from what I know about strip clubs, rules etc. But immoral to touch someone based on your beliefs and principles because she is a stripper, no, that just makes you a prick.
Of course context matters, but what you need to understand is that our answers are relative to the way we view the question. I don't think I've ever met a person who said it is ok to touch someone that doesn't want you to. Your replies are obvious right and wrong answers to basic questions about...
Exactly but that's not the question. Question is, is it immoral to touch a stripper. The question is general, you don't know the circumstances or if the stripper wants to be touched. While not touching someone without their consent can be based on principle you are assuming that this is the...
Your argument is only valid if you assume she doesn't want to be touched. Immorality (despite your use of unethical which is not in question) has to do with principle, hard to call it principle if you can make exceptions. Wrong yes but I don't think for immoral reasons.
This is a relative response that assumes god wrote the bible through man. While man can believe that it doesn't really answer the question I know that you know the op was looking for, and that is who as in a human, wrote it.
Some quick searches turned up these results.
"Who Wrote the Gospels...
As long as the church is not accepting any gov't assistance or funding there is nothing wrong with it. Beggars can't be choosers, freedom also means you can exclude if you want to. Its sad, but I will still fight for the right. Can always try a public school.