SENSITIVE SUBJECTS AND COLOUR RATINGS.

[Em Ken]

This is as simple as.

Red= Strongly Disagree
Orange= Just Disagree
Yellow= More Disagree than Agree
Green= Neutral on the subject
Light Blue= More Agree than Disagree
Blue= Just Agree
Purple= Strongly Agree

Someone will comment on a subject, lets take Euthanasia for example, and others will reply with a colour that corresponds to their view.
Oh, added to that, a comment or reason for the colour is always nice.

RIGHT.
YOU HEARD THAT.
WELL, YOU BETTER GET STARTED NOW!
CHOP, CHOP.

And, to be completely unimaginative, why don't we with Euthanasia.

[Kenny]

purple on prostitution.

As a great man once put it, "Selling is legal, fucking is legal, so why isn't selling fucking legal?"

[Kenny]

Karl, somehow i knew it would be you to respond to that

[Em Ken]

Clever idea, I will have to go with Light Blue on that.

[LimeRising]

Blue. Regulation would do wonders for the prostitution industry. If people want to sell their bodies to others, fine. If people don't want to sell their bodies, they can report forced prostitution and get help without worrying about being arrested for being a prostitute.

[XOX]

Tax exemption for religious organizations- Red

Religious organizations should be treated like all other political parties, with no tax exemption.

Stem cell research-Purple.

It save lives. It is part of medical science that should have our full support.

Euthanasia-Purple

People have rights to die with dignity.

Capital punishment- Red

I am against institutionalized killing.

Creationism-Red.

Of course.

Legalized prostitution - Purple

Sex work is work. Sex workers should have the same level of workers right.

Just realize I don't have any other colors.

Burger is unhealthy- Yellow

It really depends on how you make it. I like burger. What can I say?

[Matt]

"Religious organizations should be treated like all other political parties, with no tax exemption."

Only when talking about politics. They are only tax exempt if not talking about any governmental elections.

[XOX]

They are political entity. Even when other political entity don't do election related stuff, they are still poltical entity. Relgious organization is just the same.

When they do other stuff, like charity, then we treat that particular part of the project as any other charity. We should not treat religious organization with special exemption.

[Matt]

Are you for the separation of church and state?

[Taylor Waylor]

Purple.

the government governs all kinds of people. To mix in religion it would only make it more complicated and more biased to one side.

[XOX]

Yes. That is why religious organization should not have special treatment from the government. It would be treated like any other civil society, with no tax exemption except for project (like charity) that would give them tax exemption.

[Matt]

But churches aren't for profit, so their entire organization is considered a public charity. Also, allowing the taxation of churches gives the government a powerful tool to censor religion, making there no separation between church and state at all. Instead there's a powerful state controlling the church, and the minds of the church going members of society.

[Devin]

Euthanasia- yellow. I can see where euthanasia could a be an option worth exploring (coma patient, terminally ill and in terrible pain, etc.). The reason I would caution looking at it as completely okay is because of what I learned in the book The Giver. If anyone has read that book then they would know that euthanasia was a tactic used by the government to help control it's citizens. Nobody in the society even had an idea what death was so the government was able to call it whatever they wanted, which they called it being "released". In this sense the prospect of being "released" was something worth looking forward to as it was glorified to the community as the last great step one must take in life, though they really were just getting killed off once they reached a certain age. It was even a method of population control, one scene in the book describes the birth of twins, one of these twins was terminated on the spot based on it's weight in comparison to the other twin. This being one of the steps taken to ensure that the people of this society where never confused, or in pain.

Granted this took place, in the book that is, in a society that was completely and utterly complaint with the government. The society itself was what you might call an anti-utopia, but the idea of allowing any institutional system the ability to decide when it is time for you to die scares me.

Then again, if it was truly your choice to die and your choice alone, then that is okay with me so long as that choice was truthfully your choice and not what you might call the illusion of choice.