StarSong

Hi Melanie. Thank you for your concern. I can assure you I have used plenty of research from reliable sources, have interviewd a member of parliament for the specific laws in my country, used religious books, philosophy magazines etc. However, I also want the opinion of 'the general public,' as it were, and I also wanted a more international view. I have informed my Religious Studies teacher of what means I'm using to get my quotes and she was perfectly happy. I do not use what people say ehre as fact, but quote an opinion and then evaluate it. Whilst I have asked many people in my area and age, not all of them have such developed opinions as those who regularly write on a political forum. I wish check again with my RS teacher, because I respect your opinion it may not be such a good idea. Thank you StarSong ps, purple pen is a good idea. Nothing is more demoralising than red pen

hiya again i think the principle difference with bestiality and incest (removing any moral, religious onjections and acknowledging neither act is for procreation) is that, biologiaclly, incest is more natural to the human race as a species. There are many species that have incest as natural. However, and forgive me if I'm wrong, but i think you would be hard pushed to find many other species that have sex out of their own species. perhaps thats an extra reason why bestiality is taboo

Well I'm from England, so i have to admit striaght off that i don't really know about your country very much, and I'd be being rude if i attempted to pretend otherwise. But surely, maybe i'm idealistic and naive, but doen't everyone want the same? equality, just poiliticians, no poverty, a good environment, good medical etc? maybe if all countries concentrated on those things, and perhaps looked to improving others as well as their own countries, we'd all get on better too

Hi again though i might give you a puzzle my rs teacher foisted on us the other week. she sat down at the front of teh class and claimed there was nothign wrong with incest and it was perfectly acceptable. as a knee jerk reaction we all looked at her in astonishment and said 'of COURSE it's wrong' she asked why? and you know what, we couldn't actually give a reason. I'm personally agnostic, so i can't rely on a religious view of God says no. When i though about it a bit more, i realised that most of incest being 'wrong' is just a rule made by man (if you believe holy book to be man written) it is simply an idea someone had. By no means does this mean i would wish to conentance incest, i still personally find it a very uncomfortable subject. but the fact i have to face is this is only society, and what i have grown up with. i won't renounce that, but i thought it was interesting. I mean, you obviously get the big questions of what are 'right' and 'wrong' and where do they come from, but that fact remains that incest is not wrong biologically - just look at the animal kingdom! what do you think?

I think it's hard to tell. because obviously, those who believe to have had religious experience are not going to be convinced by a scientist informing them due to the high levels of this hormone or that chemical that they had an apparition similarly, someone who has not had any experience would then not be convinced by someone saying that things had been revealed to them or they had had a vision. It would also be very rude to ridicule either side for their belief. As Wittegenstein (i think, if i ahve the right philosopher, sorry if not) you cannot laugh at someone else game if you do not understand the rules ie, you cannot laugh at a belief if you do not understand what it is based on. as we can never truly get into someone elses mind and so can never know the influences. I'm as sceptic as they come sometimes, but i don't believe you can rule out the supernatural if you ahev no experience. But then, you cannot make it 'fact' either if you do ahve experience. I felt i had experience of the supernatural once, but i don't know what it may have been. as to being hardwired to believe in something, that's interesting. I wouldn't say that was nature, rather nuture. Like every child (well, almost) is led to believe in father Christams, and when you're 6 it is perfecetly acceptable to believe that Santa can in fact come down the chimney, can eat a mince pie in EVERY house and not seem to explode, adn can carry every present in one night! But that's not a biological requirement, we are just more impressionable when young. I think one way to look at it is many people offer personal evidence of supernatural. people may try to prove it, but there is no way to disprove it

sorry, never quite got the hang of the quoting thing...

Cool nickname. Thanks! And thank you to everyone who's replied, i can use just about everything you're all saying in my coursework! The question of morality I leave to you, as I this this to be a personal judgement call. yes, it is a personal call. But sadly if i only put my own opinion in the examiners will crush me from a great height and write all over my work in nasty red pen. Which is why i value what everyone is saying so much. some other questions I'd like to ask just to get some responses are. is euthanasia more acceptable than suicide in terms of pain left for those behind? (or vice versa) can you compare euthanising animals to people? should doctors prepare themselves to have to acquiesce to the requests of those wishing to die even if they do not agree morally? or should they be able to pass responsobilty? and your religious views as well please! thanks so much StarSong

Hiya everyone! I'm a 17 year old student from the uk, and I'm studying for a religious studies a-level. my coursework question is What are the moral and religious differences, if any, between Euthanasia and Suicide? Why may these distinctions be important? I want to get as many poeple's opinions as possible to use in my work. I've read some of the topics on here and people seem to ahve really developed views. i would be so grateful for your opinions! please help me! StarSong