It does, but be careful: social conservatives don't have a monopoly on that- there are social progressives who tithe, too.
...sometimes, out of the same checking account.
...sometimes, out of the same checking account.
I quite clearly remember how, after I had left Church, our teacher in the ethics class (who was a catholic priest...) condemned his views as being 'unchristian'. When I challenged him by asking why that was relevant in a class about ethics, he told me in no unclear terms that in his class, we'd learn about 'Christian ethics'. Period.Until a fetus has the capacity for pain and pleasure (18 weeks), it's morally neutral whether to kill it. Until it has self-awareness (one month after birth), it should have the same rights as any other non-self-aware animal.
True enough. It would certainly be interesting to see how it breaks down based on political leanings and religious declaration. An interesting point, that I came across a while back, was that Americans are more 'generous' in their charitable donations than are Canadians. Perhaps it has something to do with our feeling that we're already doing some good, via our taxes as applied to the social safety net?
But it is when it comes to women and pregnancy. Those who want to force women to complete their pregnancies disregard the risk they are taking and if they are taking these risks volontarely. A father can't be forced to give blood to his two years old child that needs the blood to live, but a woman should be forced to give her uterus to a zygote. It is a double standard.Danger to the donor is never irrelevant.
Pregnancies also carry a risk of injury and death. Why should one be a choice, but not the other?Remember, bone marrow transplants are a surgical procedure. Even though they are low-risk compared to other surgeries, all surgeries carry some risk of death or serious injury.
Survivability is not the crux of the issue here. It is the sovereignty the dad has over his body, that a woman cannot fully enjoy. Well in some part of the world. Here a woman can get an abortion anytime she wants, at least legally. You are not a person until your are fully born alive.In most- not all- cases, if the Dad says no, the kid still has a reasonable chance of survival if another donor can be found. A familial donator is always preferred, but isn't necessary.
That may be overstated.
Québec is the province who gives the least to charity. The rational that has been brought up is that we were use to giving to the Catholic Church which was in charge of redistribution. After the Quiet Revolution, the state took over the Church, the tithe became taxes and charity became social programs. It was a switch of institutions, but not habits.
True enough. It would certainly be interesting to see how it breaks down based on political leanings and religious declaration. An interesting point, that I came across a while back, was that Americans are more 'generous' in their charitable donations than are Canadians. Perhaps it has something to do with our feeling that we're already doing some good, via our taxes as applied to the social safety net?
i trust centralized secular government to help more poor people without judging them than I do a church.