There are some issues I understand but I disagree with. I am completely pro-choice, but I understand the pro-life position. I understand that if, for whatever reason, you believe that human life begins at conception, and termination of that is murder, that you have a moral obligation to do your best to put an end to that, even if it is not your child (eg, you look at it as preventing the murder of someone else's child). I disagree with the premise (eg the belief that it is a "human" life with all the rights), but if we hold that premise to be true, their line of argument makes sense because murder is something that the entire society has an interest in preventing. Again, I'm just about the most pro-choice person ever, but I can appreciate the logic of the other side.
On the other hand, I just don't understand the opposition to gay marriage. It doesn't make any sense to me. Nobody is being hurt, and your life is not being affected in any way. It's something I can't fathom - I just can't follow their logic.
And it's not like God's going to let them in if he exists.
Or option b) he was a power hungry douche and did whatever he could to gain and keep absolute power.
Last edited by silentstriker; 15-10-2011 at 11:29 AM.
I think John Stuart Mill summed it up best when he said the original source is often the best place to start when assessing a position, so if you have the time maybe Michael Oakeshott's essay 'on being a conservative' would be a good place to start for a better exposition on the philosophical postion towards government.
Michael Oakeshott - On Being a Conservative.pdf
Btw. David Cameron just last week at the Tory conference said he "supports gay marraige, because he is a conservative" would be intersting to hear a more detailed view of his position.
Last edited by Redbacks; 15-10-2011 at 04:32 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)