• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?[W:296, 650]

Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?


  • Total voters
    118
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

So iran, where 80% or more of the population wants shar'ia law, where gays are thrown off buildings while crowds watch, is the same as the modern christian world. Is that why all 7 countries that officially execute for homosexuality are muslim, not christian?

Because Iran doesn't have a secular society like the U.S. does. It's the society that allows religious extremism to run rampant. Secular society reigns in the Christian insanity here for the most part. There aren't many, perhaps any, non-secular societies where Christianity is on top, although if you go back into history, before secular societies were common, Christians did exactly what you describe. Oh, and let's not forget Uganda, where the Christians in charge tried to impose a death penalty for homosexuality.

About 2/3 of the US is Christian, so it's not the 1/3 who are secular who prevent atrocities. Roughly 70% of the country thinks gay relationships should be legal. That's not nearly high enough, but executions? Probably more like 10-15%, the same fringe of radicals who think AIDS is divine justice. Unlike in iran though, i'm confident their numbers will continue to dwindle

We have a Constitutionally-mandated secular government and a society where the vast majority of people live almost entirely secular lives. In Iran, people follow religious dictates 24/7, here, most people might spend an hour a week in church and then not do anything religious for the rest of the week.

From the federal "general social survey," you can see that the generational gap is as big a predictor of support for gay rights as religious affiliation. Yes, half of americans want a state religion, but what that entails is far diff from shar'ia law

The gender gap is what will eventually kill religion in America, the most religious are aging, the majority of people who are regular church goers are over 70 and will soon die off. More than half of people under the age of 18 are either non-religious or barely religious. Almost every organized religion in America is hemorrhaging members like mad. It won't be long now.

Comparing ISIS to 1600s Christianity or 2015 uganda is one thing, but what you're doing just makes atheists look delusional. You fail to appreciate or even acknowledge the progress that has been made.

How is it failing to appreciate the progress that has been made? We have a secular society. That is progress. However, it hasn't been progress from within Christianity, it's been something that has been imposed on them from without. They didn't choose to moderate themselves, they were forced into submission. Islam hasn't had that happen yet. It's still acting exactly the same way that Christianity acted in the 1600s and will continue to do so until secularism puts it under control.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

No one HAS to be in the UN. If they dont like the treaty they signed, they can leave it, and its protections.

Which still won't stop the UN from running their lives. If Iran walked away from the UN, they'd still be up for a stiff fight over getting nukes.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I suspect we would do that if we could be assured others got rid of theirs as well. Elimination of nuclear weapons has been a US goal as far back as Ronald Reagan.

I expect that you are 100% wrong about that
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I expect that you are 100% wrong about that

Best Reagan Quotes on Nuclear Weapons
“We seek the total elimination one day of nuclear weapons from the face of the Earth.”
Ronald Reagan, Inaugural Address, 1985
“A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. The only value in our two nations possessing nuclear weapons is to make sure they will never be used. But then would it not be better to do away with them entirely?”
Ronald Reagan, 1984 State of the Union
“It is my fervent goal and hope…that we will some day no longer have to rely on nuclear weapons to deter aggression and assure world peace. To that end the United States is now engaged in a serious and sustained effort to negotiate major reductions in levels of offensive nuclear weapons with the ultimate goal of eliminating these weapons from the face of the earth.”
Ronald Reagan, October 20, 1986
“I can’t believe that this world can go on beyond our generation and on down to succeeding generations with this kind of weapon on both sides poised at each other without someday some fool or some maniac or some accident triggering the kind of war that is the end of the line for all of us. And I just think of what a sigh of relief would go up from everyone on this earth if someday–and this is what I have–my hope, way in the back of my head–is that if we start down the road to reduction, maybe one day in doing that, somebody will say, ‘Why not all the way? Let’s get rid of all these things’.”
Ronald Reagan, May 16, 1983

“My central arms control objective has been to reduce substantially, and ultimately to eliminate, nuclear weapons and rid the world of the nuclear threat. The prevention of the spread of nuclear explosives to additional countries is an indispensable part of our efforts to meet this objective. I intend to continue my pursuit of this goal with untiring determination and a profound sense of personal commitment.”
Ronald Reagan, March 25, 1988 Message to Congress on NPT
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I guess the question is does someone have a right if they cannot exercise it.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I heard someone make the argument that Obama doesn't believe the US has any rightful role in preventing or hindering Iran from developing and maintaining nuclear weapons. I don't know that that's true, and nobody but the President can answer to what he believes, so I'll ask what you believe. If Iran has the ability, does it have the "right" to nuclear weapons? (By "right", I mean the U.S. and other nations would not be unjustified in trying to prevent it.)

working on the poll
By its own words and deeds Iran has forfeited all of its "Rights" beyond the basic necessities of life_

And should remain so until Iranians' replace their current power structure with one more people friendly_
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

By its own words and deeds Iran has forfeited all of its "Rights" beyond the basic necessities of life_

And should remain so until Iranians' replace their current power structure with one more people friendly_

Who has made that divine decree?
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

By its own words and deeds Iran has forfeited all of its "Rights" beyond the basic necessities of life_

And should remain so until Iranians' replace their current power structure with one more people friendly_

If by deeds, then the only power to have used nukes on civilian targets has forfeited its "rights"!
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

War with Iran is probably
our best option


our best option"> Joshua Muravchik
It may be the only way to block Iran from gaining nuclear weapons.

Joshua Muravchik is a fellow at the Foreign Policy Institute of Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies.

The logical flaw in the indictment of a looming “very bad” nuclear deal with Iran that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered before Congress this month was his claim that we could secure a “good deal” by calling Iran’s bluff and imposing tougher sanctions. The Iranian regime that Netanyahu described so vividly — violent, rapacious, devious and redolent with hatred for Israel and the United States — is bound to continue its quest for nuclear weapons by refusing any “good deal” or by cheating.
This gives force to the Obama administration’s taunting rejoinder: What is Netanyahu’s alternative? War? But the administration’s position also contains a glaring contradiction. National security adviser Susan Rice declared at an American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference before Netanyahu’s speech that “a bad deal is worse than no deal.” So if Iran will accept only a “bad deal,” what is President Obama’s alternative? War?
Obama’s stance implies that we have no choice but to accept Iran’s best offer — whatever is, to use Rice’s term, “achievable” — because the alternative is unthinkable.
But should it be? What if force is the only way to block Iran from gaining nuclear weapons? That, in fact, is probably the reality. Ideology is the raison d’etre of Iran’s regime, legitimating its rule and inspiring its leaders and their supporters. In this sense, it is akin to communist, fascist and Nazi regimes that set out to transform the world. Iran aims to carry its Islamic revolution across the Middle East and beyond. A nuclear arsenal, even if it is only brandished, would vastly enhance Iran’s power to achieve that goal. . . .
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

We have a Constitutionally-mandated secular government and a society where the vast majority of people live almost entirely secular lives. In Iran, people follow religious dictates 24/7, here, most people might spend an hour a week in church and then not do anything religious for the rest of the week.

Our constitution has to this point failed to protect us from "RFRA"s and numerous other anti gay laws. In and of itself, it means nothing if courts won't enforce it, due to popular mandate. Even Jefferson, who coined "separation of church and state", favored castration for same sex acts and virginia passed death sentences well after the constitution was ratified - much like a muslim state

We may have a secular government technically, but it is not only secularists who have protected gay couples from prosecution in most states since 1980. Further proof lies in countries in western europe/scandinavia, where there is no separation of church and state, and yet they have been far ahead in gay rights


How is it failing to appreciate the progress that has been made? We have a secular society. That is progress. However, it hasn't been progress from within Christianity, it's been something that has been imposed on them from without. They didn't choose to moderate themselves, they were forced into submission. Islam hasn't had that happen yet. It's still acting exactly the same way that Christianity acted in the 1600s and will continue to do so until secularism puts it under control.

It's been both activism and a reduction in anti gay sentiment among theists, who are still the majority
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

I guess the question is does someone have a right if they cannot exercise it.

Yes, the right still exists even though external forces are suppressing it.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Why? That use saved millions of lives.

That's a hypothetical, worn out explanation that attempts to legitimize targeting innocent civilians.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

War compels cruel choices. The morally preferable path was chosen.

Which would have been the emperor of Japan's famous last words had he developed the bomb first, and then deployed them at Fullerton and Glendale CA.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

They have the right if the big countries (US, Russia, China) say they have the right.

If the big countries say they don't have a right, then they don't.

Such is the world's pecking order and functioning.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Hardly worn out since it is supported by the evidence.

It's argued by some historians. Other historians argue differently.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

They have the right if the big countries (US, Russia, China) say they have the right.

If the big countries say they don't have a right, then they don't.

Such is the world's pecking order and functioning.

Yes. But we don't publicly declare such things.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Which would have been the emperor of Japan's famous last words had he developed the bomb first, and then deployed them at Fullerton and Glendale CA.

His was the cause of tyranny. No equivalence.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

Yes, the right still exists even though external forces are suppressing it.

I suppose a right could exist although it was being suppressed. So who do you think determines what rights a nation legitimately has?
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

His was the cause of tyranny. No equivalence.

It doesn't matter what you think, or what's actually the truth. It's what would have been declared, and it's what most Japanese would have argued for the past 70 years, and been used to justify the atrocity. That's how it works................Jack.
 
Re: Does Iran have a "Right" to Nuclear Weapons?

It doesn't matter what you think, or what's actually the truth. It's what would have been declared, and it's what most Japanese would have argued for the past 70 years, and been used to justify the atrocity. That's how it works................Jack.

No Japanese nuclear attack on two cities in the US could have tipped the war in Japan's favor.
 
Back
Top Bottom