Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For the next 5 weeks the class I am taking focuses on Ethics and Morals and I have a few suggestions for topics that we could discuss in class as they relate to the subject. I just wanted to see what kind of response I might expect when I brought them up. I'm sure none of you mind throwing out your opinions. Just please try to be respectful in your response. I'm not trying to offend anyone. Thanks in advance.
If a person is receiving ANY form of governmental assistance, should the government be allowed to limit the number of children that person has?
If a person's insurance is COMPLETELY funded by the government and that person is on life support, does the government have a say as to when to pull the plug? If not should they?
Should prostitution be legalized in ALL states?
Is a church that has a large number of openly gay members immoral in allowing these members to be a part of their congregation?
Would it be seen as immoral if an openly gay person was the pastor of a church?
No to ANY form of assisitance. If you are talking about welfare programs such as WIC, Section 8, Food Stamps, maybe. Depends on their length of time on the programs.
If brain dead or no chance of recovery, yes.
Yes to prostitution.
If the churches teach that homosexuality is wrong, yes to 4 and 5.
For the next 5 weeks the class I am taking focuses on Ethics and Morals and I have a few suggestions for topics that we could discuss in class as they relate to the subject. I just wanted to see what kind of response I might expect when I brought them up. I'm sure none of you mind throwing out your opinions. Just please try to be respectful in your response. I'm not trying to offend anyone. Thanks in advance.
If a person is receiving ANY form of governmental assistance, should the government be allowed to limit the number of children that person has?
So, how do you mean this? Someone's benefits are cut off until they are sterilized? I don't know how you would implement that. We do currently have a system that rewards people for being single parents and that does need to change.
Quote:
If a person's insurance is COMPLETELY funded by the government and that person is on life support, does the government have a say as to when to pull the plug? If not should they?
Regardless what someone thinks should or should not happen, from what I understand they do have a say in what happens here. In all cases where government is footing the bill they do have a say. I think that most cases where a person is that bad off they are gone anyhow and you are only keeping their body alive. How many of these would only keep someone's body alive for years and they die anyway and it is at the expense of the taxpayers? Aren't we are talking about an extreme here? If I am wrong then please someone tell me.
Quote:
Should prostitution be legalized in ALL states?
No, I don't see why it needs to be everywhere. I like that laws very from state to state and not just regarding prostitution. I am more likely to find a place a like to live if I have a variety to choose from. Let the individual states decide for themselves.
Quote:
Is a church that has a large number of openly gay members immoral in allowing these members to be a part of their congregation?
Would it be seen as immoral if an openly gay person was the pastor of a church?
I'm not religious, so I'm gonna leave the last two questions alone.
I have other directions that you could discuss over the next five weeks.
I decided to answer these also.
Quote:
1) We all want roll models for our children. Should we allow anybody, convicted of a felony, to hold a position in the public spotlight? That includes politicians, athletes, celebrities and the media.
Politicians - no, the rest OK
Quote:
2)Starvation is currently the only acceptable way we euthanize our elderly in all fifty states. Doctors can simply remove the feeding tubes from patients that have signed DNR forms. Why have we not embraced a more sensible, swift, humane, method to end our lives?
While starvation is a horrible way to die, I think some, self included are concerned that if it becomes to acceptable to kill people, it may happen when they are just inconvenient to those that have to care for them.
Quote:
3)Our population has now passed seven billion. When is enough, enough? What distinguishes humans from the microbes in a Petri dish - that consume all the food and die?
What are you trying to say here exactly? That we shouldn't make any more people, be limited to one per couple like in China? What really?
Quote:
4)What role should robotics, technology and online education play in educating our young? It is evident that they (the computers) are getting smarter by the minute. Should or will this new form of education take over?
How are they getting smarter when people are getting dumber?
Quote:
5)In a capitalist society is it healthy for some to work all their lives while others receive all their lives?
There will always be the disabled and the elderly. These alone should be the receivers. We are all one car accident or a few decades away from being in one of these categories and these are the people we should take care of. These account for only a small portion of those receiving and that is an unhealthy problem, making it hard to take care of those we should.
If a person is receiving ANY form of governmental assistance, should the government be allowed to limit the number of children that person has?
No, but there is a moral obligation for the recipient to refrain from pregnancy until such time as they are self supportive. consider that the government does not exist except for taxpayer support. The government has no money of its own. there is also an assumption that the recipients will appreciate the assistance and show thanks by acting responsibly. The question is what happens when recipients are unethical and prefer to remain indefinitely on taxpayer donations?
If a person's insurance is COMPLETELY funded by the government and that person is on life support, does the government have a say as to when to pull the plug? If not should they?
If the patient's care is completely funded by the taxpayers the government representative should absolutely have the right to pull the plug. You take the consequences of a free ride or you take care of yourself and make your own decisions. A living will takes some of the drama out of the government pulling the plug.
Should prostitution be legalized in ALL states?
Maybe
Is a church that has a large number of openly gay members immoral in allowing these members to be a part of their congregation?
Would it be seen as immoral if an openly gay person was the pastor of a church?
Is a church that has a large number of openly gay members immoral in allowing these members to be a part of their congregation?
Would it be seen as immoral if an openly gay person was the pastor of a church?
These two questions seem to deal more with religion specifically. I would think the answer would depend upon what church or religion you are talking about.
It seems to me that a lot of people associate ethics with religion. The two are not mutually exclusive. A person can live with ethical integrity, and no religion at all. A person can claim to be very religious, but have low ethical standards. One does not determine the other.
For the next 5 weeks the class I am taking focuses on Ethics and Morals and I have a few suggestions for topics that we could discuss in class as they relate to the subject. I just wanted to see what kind of response I might expect when I brought them up. I'm sure none of you mind throwing out your opinions. Just please try to be respectful in your response. I'm not trying to offend anyone. Thanks in advance.
If a person is receiving ANY form of governmental assistance, should the government be allowed to limit the number of children that person has?
If a person's insurance is COMPLETELY funded by the government and that person is on life support, does the government have a say as to when to pull the plug? If not should they?
Should prostitution be legalized in ALL states?
Is a church that has a large number of openly gay members immoral in allowing these members to be a part of their congregation?
Would it be seen as immoral if an openly gay person was the pastor of a church?
If a person is receiving government assistance I do believe that person should be responsible enough not to have any kids. If an individual expect OUT tax money to go them, we as that stakeholder have a say on those people. At some point I do believe that is someone keeps having kids I believe the state on behalf of the taxpayer should take that kid away and give it to a couple that can afford to have him/her.
On the insurance question, it is the same. If you ask me to help you in some form, it is appropriate to let you know what rules may apply if you want my money to help you. You then decide whether you want my help or not, correct?
Prostitution if it is not forced it is a personal choice and just as a woman has the right to decide what to do with her body when it applies to abortion the same principle applies. It is not anybody's business as far as I am concerned and the state should not interfere.
The church has the right to accept anyone they want as their members. There are some churches that do not see homosexuality as wrong so why would be they be immoral if they allow gays in their congregation. On the other hand if a church does not allow gays in their church they have the right to follow their precepts whether I agree with them or not AS LONG as they do not try to impose their moral views on the rest of society.
Again, it depends on the church. However, some churches do not argue against the orientation per say but the act. In other words, you can be gay but as long as you do not act on your desires a church may not have a problem. It is no different than if a guy in church strongly desires to we with another famale and he and she are married. As long as they do not act on their desires, the church most likely will not expel them if they do not commit adultery. Granted some religious people may use Jesus words that say that if a man looks a woman with sexual desire he alreayd commited adultery in his hart. Well, the churches would be empty if every man and woman that has had those desires was expelled. Take care.
These two questions seem to deal more with religion specifically. I would think the answer would depend upon what church or religion you are talking about.
Right. The question assumes that all 'churches' (and really all religions) automatically have an issue with homosexuality, which simply isn't true. As it stands the question really makes no sense and can't even be debated.
For the next 5 weeks the class I am taking focuses on Ethics and Morals and I have a few suggestions for topics that we could discuss in class as they relate to the subject. I just wanted to see what kind of response I might expect when I brought them up. I'm sure none of you mind throwing out your opinions. Just please try to be respectful in your response. I'm not trying to offend anyone. Thanks in advance.
If a person is receiving ANY form of governmental assistance, should the government be allowed to limit the number of children that person has?
If a person's insurance is COMPLETELY funded by the government and that person is on life support, does the government have a say as to when to pull the plug? If not should they?
Should prostitution be legalized in ALL states?
Is a church that has a large number of openly gay members immoral in allowing these members to be a part of their congregation?
Would it be seen as immoral if an openly gay person was the pastor of a church?
The problem with discussing ethics and morals is that many if not most people bring in their own prejudices and ingrained/trained beliefs into the "morality" question. Some folks believe that there would be no morality without religion, others believe that all morals are equal and should be considered - like the "morality" of a child molester who never murders his victims, or a rapist who has convinced himself that women really do want and need sex and he is merely altruistically providing it, not hurting anyone, really.
IMHO, morality is the basic Golden Rule - do unto others as you would have them do unto you; your rights end at my nose, mutual respect for others. Which definitions quite frankly render your last two questions moot - it is no one else's business how many people in a church are gay, not even the members of that church; and if people want to follow a gay preacher's teachings, that is their own business, no one else's. In a truly moral society, everyone is free to associate - or to not associate - with whomever they choose.
As for the prostitution question, there is no "should" or "shouldn't" - there are only the rights of the individual to choose to either practice or indulge in prostitution, as long as it is a free exchange of payment and services, without force or coercion. That is often not the case, especially due to self-proclaimed 'moralists' forcing such free exchange into the black market and 'underground' trade where abuse, self-abuse, thievery and even murder are often overlooked.
As for the "government dependence" questions - any time you cede your rights to an individual or group for sustenance (or protection, or any other reason), you freely give up those rights, especially the rights to make your own decisions, to that individual or group - whether you accept that or even realize it. If the individual or group decides to make their succor dependent on any rules, you have the choice to either abide by those rules, or remove yourself from your indentured status. If you choose to subjugate yourself to another for benefits, you choose to pay the price for those benefits. It is up to each individual whether or not the price is worth it - buyer beware. There is no "free lunch"; many people give up not only their self-respect but their ability to reason, operate freely as an individual, and make their own decisions - selling their birthright for a mess of pottage - rather than accepting the responsibility and consequences for their own actions (or inactions).
I have other directions that you could discuss over the next five weeks.
1) We all want roll models for our children. Should we allow anybody, convicted of a felony, to hold a position in the public spotlight? That includes politicians, athletes, celebrities and the media.
Role models should not be TV celebrites or sports Figures but rather every day people that take time out of thie life to go work at a soup kicthen or volunteer at the ASPCA and give back to the community
2)Starvation is currently the only acceptable way we euthanize our elderly in all fifty states. Doctors can simply remove the feeding tubes from patients that have signed DNR forms. Why have we not embraced a more sensible, swift, humane, method to end our lives?
why they died of natural causes are you saying hospital staff should do lethal injections?
3)Our population has now passed seven billion. When is enough, enough? What distinguishes humans from the microbes in a Petri dish - that consume all the food and die?
Well thing about that is mother nature and seems to keep populations in check and the fsct that we are always fighting in wars is in a sense population control.
4)What role should robotics, technology and online education play in educating our young? It is evident that they (the computers) are getting smarter by the minute. Should or will this new form of education take over? Fact is in the next 25-30 years computers will be able to process information at such speeds and have AI that we alreadt depend on and soon computers will reach a higher level of intelligence than then we can.
5)In a capitalist society is it healthy for some to work all their lives while others receive all their lives?
People need to have the self respect and know the value of hard work. otherwise if everyone just did nothing and every thing was handed to them we would come dependant on it and not reach our full potential which is to be a productive memeber of society abd thuis would not contribute anything of value..You would be a Burden instead of an asset.
Last edited by TheViking85; 12-21-2011 at 04:53 PM..
Reason: Refrain from the use of colored fonts in the Great Debates section, especially red.
For the next 5 weeks the class I am taking focuses on Ethics and Morals and I have a few suggestions for topics that we could discuss in class as they relate to the subject. I just wanted to see what kind of response I might expect when I brought them up. I'm sure none of you mind throwing out your opinions. Just please try to be respectful in your response. I'm not trying to offend anyone. Thanks in advance.
If a person is receiving ANY form of governmental assistance, should the government be allowed to limit the number of children that person has? No. Instead, it should place a cap on the amount allotted, Period. Vary the amount from 1 to 2 kids, but cap it with the second child.
If a person's insurance is COMPLETELY funded by the government and that person is on life support, does the government have a say as to when to pull the plug? If not should they?
Should prostitution be legalized in ALL states? Yes. But all prostitution "houses" should be institutionalized in single dwellings to ensure better government tracking of diseases, drugs, and taxes. It should NEVER legalize street hooking or even call girls ~ which almost always involve drugs.
Is a church that has a large number of openly gay members immoral in allowing these members to be a part of their congregation? No. Jesus did not discrminate.
Would it be seen as immoral if an openly gay person was the pastor of a church? Again, no. I think God takes into consideration the good works that they do for Him, and that love and family has evolved to include gay unions succeeding in parenthood.
The only one I couldn't really answer is question #2, because that is SUCH a sensitive topic.
Last edited by TheViking85; 12-21-2011 at 04:55 PM..
Reason: Refrain from using colored fonts in the Great Debates section, and please answer outside the quote from now on.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
