: Should socialists have a certain view in order to be 'qualified' as socialists?
Very interesting point Gee, a long thread could grow out of that on it's own, I'm against party lines myself but that said there must be some consistancy, I mean I couldnt simply claim to be a libertarian capitalist if I wanted full nationalisation and regualtion of every aspect of human life (I dont wna that by the way, just giving an example).
: : Freedom is a term that can and has been used to justify the most horrible crimes and abuses in history.
: You bet. Russian and European history this century atest to two of the most perverse meanings from the 'freedom' spoken of by generations of soviet leaders to the very poignant 'work is freedom' sign over the concentration camp (I forget which one). Most twisted.
'Work sets you free' is the quote it's from a Nazi concentration camp. I dont understand the confusion about freedom, every freedom two is a freedom from, there is no dilemma at all.
: : It's a hard question to solve, because it depends on the definition of when the fetus becomes human,
: Precisely - or another view, when it can survive without intervention (ie breathe, function without machine). That view is to discount technology driving the date back constantly. Who'd make that judgement?
: soul: How are we to know? We don't even agree on whether the soul exists. (I say yes, but RD and otehrs, I think, say no.) This is why the problem is so complicated.
: You said it with "how are we to know?". As with religion everyone is really an agnostic ("Not knowing") on these matters, although its prudent to suggest that the burden of proof lies with the proponent/believer rather than in proving its not there. As with any theory - If I were to suggest some outlandish physics theory then I should demonstrate it, not sit back and claim victory until proven wrong.