[anenselog]

An understanding needs to be reached that there are two types of haram, if this isn't already the case (my knowledge is still being acquired) and that would not surprise me in the least.

There is spiritual haram, against Allah and there is social haram. The distinguishing feature is that social haram must be based on harm done to another unwilling participant in an action or its consequences. Spiritual haram, on the other hand, is between the person and Allah and it is in that person's fundamental right of freewill to engage in those activities if that person wants to and suffer the consequences. It is not for society to deny him his choice.

a few principles that guide me...

The Harm Principle: accredited to John Stuart Mills. Aside from getting into the bifurcation of retributive actions being both official actions of the state versus unofficial actions of society, he also had an opinion about what sorts of actions should be legally or socially unacceptable. He said that any action one takes that does no harm to anyone else, but does (or does not) do harm to yourself, or any other willing participant, should not be legally or socially illegal. He stress on the reactions of society in terms of discrimination and the like, shouldn't be harmful themselves.

This defines socially haram.

Education of morals and ethics: those actions which do not harm another, but harm yourself, as understood by segments of society, can taught as principles of action. The source of those principles can be any religion or moral system. You cannot force someone to learn those principles, only offer it if a student asks for instruction.

This defines spiritual haram. These two principles can fit together quite nicely, but the second should not be forced onto the first.

Issue Policy The Harm Principle Personal Morals Marriage penalty taxation opposite to the right path. give deductions to economic co-ops, including marriage of all forms completely violates completely violates Unconditional support for Israel conditional suppport violates may violate Abortion legal, for health, but counsel and explore other options for harmony. can the community help the situation by forming a tax deductible co-op? does not violate completely violates Gay marriage legal, but educate does not violate may violate Legalized marijuana legal, but educate does not violate may violate Polygamy legal, but educate does not violate may violate School Choice promote does not violate educates morals and ethics Sex education in school promote does not violate educates morals and ethics Giving underage kids access to contraceptives promote does not violate educates morals and ethics



Marriage penalty taxation opposite to the right path They should get a break, since 2+ adults are getting together to share their life, so their impact is lower, so they should get a break. Any union, even a coop without sexual interaction can be considered as a unit of economic activity. This aligns economic coops with civil unions. The Harm Principle completely violates Personal Morals completely violates
Gay marriage legal Yes, they do not violate the harm principle. There are strong statements against this in several Scriptures. The Harm Principle does not violate Personal Morals may violate
Legalized marijuana legal Yes, they do not violate the harm principle. There are strong statements against intoxication in Scriptures. Getting high does not result in intoxication. You probably should drive, and if you aren't driving well, stop and switch or get charged if caught. The Harm Principle does not violate Personal Morals may violate
Polygamy legal Yes, they do not violate the harm principle. There are statements for this in several Scriptures. It should not be due to lust, but that is a personal principle and not a societal principle. The Harm Principle does not violate Personal Morals may violate
Abortion legal It does violate the harm principle. However, the woman is clearly responsible for her body and the fetus is entirely a part of her. It is her decision and she suffers the consequences. Therefore, it actually does NOT violate the harm principle. It is the second worst sin (the first is denying God), since you are killing an expression of God. The Harm Principle does not violate Personal Morals may violate
School Choice legal Yes, they do not violate the harm principle. This is the way to have public funding, but private service. There are good schools in the private sector and this is the way to teach specific community based (Scriptural or otherwise) principles. This is NOT to say that public schools should not teach several courses on comparative religion, taking all 4 years if one wishes. This should be a part of the Philosophy department. The Harm Principle does not violate Personal Morals does not violate
Unconditional support for Israel conditional suppport They violate the harm principle. We should support them, but not necessarily militarily. But not unconditionally. Got to fix this situation and Israel's penchant for settlement building in the West Bank, on water control points must be reversed. 1968 was the year they agreed to a boundary, I believe. The Harm Principle violates Personal Morals violates
Sex education in school legal Yes, it helps people understand the harm principle, as applied to sex. It does not mean people are going to run out and have sex. Trust you children, because at this age they are going to do what they decide what they are going to do. The Harm Principle does not violate Personal Morals educates morals and ethics
Giving underage kids access to contraceptives legal Absolutely, they do not violate the harm principle and they should not be viewed as giving approval or encouragement. The Harm Principle does not violate Personal Morals educates morals and ethics