Gay marriage: in terms of civil union, I have no problem with it, and as America is meant to separate church from state, it shouldn’t be an issue. But since so much of America is fundamentally Christian, the issue is more complex.

Stem cell research uses the cells of aborted foetuses. I cannot condone a form of research that profits from murder.

Abortion: I get tired of people saying “but it’s a personal choice” to people who are pro-life. Surely you can see that for pro-life people abortion is murder and so can’t be ignored? I wouldn’t say “well, it’s up to you” if a woman committed infanticide, after all.

Which is all very fine and liberal, but unfortunately most conservatives believe that their views on these issues are precisely those that should be imposed on the entire population. You can throw any argument you like at them but if they are diametrically opposed because of their value system, intellectual argument isn’t going to mean squat. They think they’re being moral and you’re just degenerate. You may as well try to convince someone that paedophilia is a matter of personal choice. There’s not a lot you can do about this except persuade everyone who agrees with you to vote and then use that power to impose your own ‘liberal’ moral fascism instead of the ‘conservative’ moral fascism we see in the US today. Generally liberals wont do this as they naturally balk at imposing their will on others. This is why conservatives win.

I do see some Bush-Hitler parallels, but only in the sense that Bush is a very average man who was constantly dismissed as ineffectual by his peers in business, only to suddenly find himself ‘in charge’ and able to give vent to his petulant frustrations that the world isn’t how he’d like it to be. In other words, Bush and Hitler can both be described as losers who somehow managed to embody the feelings and aspirations of the masses.

I think I’ve heard every polemic that’s ever been spoken about Dubya and after a while they tend towards extreme hyperbole (out of sheer frustration) and lose all their impact. You may as well be pissing in the wind for all the impact it has on the Bushites.

If only there were more people in the world whose views were as balanced and fair as yours, Thomas :-/

It was good, but it made me very angry to see the way politicans have manipulated/been manipulated by the terrorist threat. The basic thrust of the programme was that both neo-conservatives and extreme Islamists have a vested interest in keeping their peoples in a permanent state of fear, whether justified or not. Evidence was presented that Al-Qaeda (or however the hell you spell it) is not a huge, well-organised cohesive unit with a leader (Bin Laden or anyone else), but that events like 9/11 were perpetrated by small disparate clusters of disaffected young men, and that support for the extreme Islamist vision has actually pretty much been falling apart among its former supporters, due to internecine fighting and disgust with various murders and attacks.

I find it somewhat ironic that both the neo-Cons and the Islamists have a similar value system in many respects – both of them hating liberalisation – homosexuality, godlessness, sex before marriage, etc etc.

Anyway, the programme concluded that much of the warnings about further terrorist attacks are largely fantasies constructed by the neo-Cons, the idea that if a country exists in a state of permanent fear, they will look to a strong government – who can then present itself as the defender of peace, enemy of terrorism.

It certainly showed a lot of things I’d previously taken for granted in a new light.

Sweden’s cool. Lots of Ice Bars to hang out in. I’d come and visit you! ^__^

I know intelligent, very world-knowledgable friends who are actually now frightened by what they are seeing in the US. They see millions of people following Bush and his policies like sheep, and find it akin to the way that people followed Hitler in Nazi Germany.

I’m in no way saying that Bush is a new Hitler, but he is a very powerful, very dangerous man.

I think we should all be very cautious about what is happening here.

But those issues aren’t for dictating to others – they’re all about personal choice, and I fully allow anyone to have those views if they like. The problem is, is that Bush is a powerful man who is wanting to impose his views.

• I find the idea of stem-cell research a concern, and I do think it needs to be heavily regulated to stop abuse, but the research does need to take place.

• Gay marriage? Why the hell not. To me, the idea of marriage is the union of two people who love each other and wish to make that bond in the eyes of others. That can be between two men, two women just as much as it can between a man and a woman – in law. Whether individual churches want to forbid that, that is up to them to decide, and it is up to people to decide whether they want to be part of that church.

• Abortion? Surely that is a totally a personal choice of those involved. I understand that, for various reasons, people are against that in the same way that some are for that. I can’t see how anyone can legilate one way or the other on such an emotive issue.

In this particular issue, the laughable thing is that Bush supporters were critising Kerry for these stances, when actually he has said he personally is not in favour of abortion and gay marriage, but that he couldn’t justify legislating against it for those who feel it is their right choice.

I didn’t I’m afraid. Wednesday nights is art class night.

What was it? I’m assuming it was good…?

(Did you see ‘The Power of Nightmares’ last night, BTW?)

actually I wanted to move to sweden…but I dunno…it’s just so far away from my family and everyone I know :/

What about Europe. You thought about coming to Europe?

I think I’m gonna be hiding under my desk for the next 4 years…or moving to Canada 0:)