Indeed, but i dont think Macarthy would fall in to the same catagory even if it have simular efects Fundamentalisem is on a larger scale and usaly involve an idiolagy of total obedience and controle.

Macarthy more as you say played on The unrational fear of comunisem to his own ends.

Your right about Peopel using Religon to there own agenda not realy portraying the religon, but the person whit the Agenda... but the point is more that Religon is more a perfect medium in the past becase of it's inflexabuility of organised religon, I think we can all agree whit that there was not much chance to disobay the catholic leaders during much of europs past not matter how much might might think it's not the messige of the bible that is being presued or practised, but agine to these peopel the messige become what ever we want it to be.

My reference to Ethics is simply a rule of conduct, there is no SET ethics that refer to every path of life, but instead it need to be worked out in regards to difrent things, I belive in being flexibel whit out it we risk becoming entangled in the problem of ethics.

but in essence it's 'Right and Wrong' a subject we all hold a very difrent view on in both law and culture.

For exampel, in sweden for the state to practis Execution Is not Ethical, in some States in the USA it is, that dont make these places UnEthical only that we see that etichal points difrent.

That creates the main problem of Ethics today, the point i was trying to make in my own point of view is that Ethics should not be influenced by Religus belifes.

I remember the when before Bush Adressed the subject of Stem cell resertch he actuly consulted the Pope about it when visited him, and said that the Pope brought up some interesting points.

And i think we Can all agree, whit no disrespect to the Pops inteligence but on a scientific level nighter of the two would have much knowlige on the issue.

Having had a problematic medical history witch have resulted in inevital problems in my future Stem Cell resertch in to the promesing feild of Organ repair, not involving cloaning, or the much debated fetal stem cell resertch it makes me and others angry that this resertch get set back decades on the basis of religus arguments.

Gay issues are another subject that is being for lack of a better word attacked threw political Religus manuvering, these are issues that should be not be in the realm of religus considerations.

Abortion is alwayes a charged issue so i will try and be diblomatic about it, in Sweden this is a right as obvius as freedom of religon, for any political group to even sugest toutching this right comit political suaside, so this is something that i personaly from a cultural stand point obviesly feel very strong for, the my point is the same from above, considerations should be made from a medical standpoint as to what life is, not religus.

As in reference to "vox populi, vox Dei" i belive rought translated "voice of the peopel, Voice of God" in no offence i belive you should look up where that came from i dont know if you know but "Vox Populi, Vox Dei" is from a much longer sentence stated by a munk to 'Charles the Great' saying. "you should not listen to the peopel whom keep saying, the voice of people is the voice of God, since the acts of that crowd is alwayes close to madness" Or something like that, just a bit of trivia... i meen no offence as to the saying.

The problem to me whit Religon in Politics is that it can never satisfy two difrent religons, if you elect a muslim, and he acts in acordance to islamics belifes some of those will be incompaticel whit Cristian, and the same whit cristian and it will perhaps whit out intente guide some of his politics.

This is the reason for the seperation of churche and state is most countries, it's to keep Religus issues outside politics it's not perfect adn ti's not realy working, and i know that to realy stop religon in poletics cant be done but i would like to see a rule that stop peopel from using religus arguments in politics.

This is a Very dificult subject and i dont have all the right answeres... infact i hardly have any especialy 4am in the morning.

It all come down to a very simpel fact, we all belive wheater we want to or not, albe it not in the same things, most of us belive in everyday things things that are tangebul, things that are proven facts... some belive in bigfoot some belive in Aliense abducting peopel...

Others belive whole heartedly in God

Others in Allah

Even others in Budda

The list go on and on...

To me as long as someone dont look to their belife and belive they are superior and the only belife alowed, and that I cant belive difrently or act difrently love difrently or look difrently.... all of these belives are wounderus and fantastic... all of them hold some truth in them, weather they to you hold mirecals or coinsidents fact or fiction proof or theory... they should be respected for that they are, how they have changed the life and history of so many peopel.


Unfortunatly history also who us how religon have been abused... this is what we must guard aginest and not repeat the horros past be it the cristians in Rowanda, or Muslims at 9/11...

The problem is Not RELIGON thow... it's Hate and fear... unfortunatly... in this world there is no lack of either.