The thing to remember with the RU486 scare stories is that RU486's safety has to be compared to other possible outcomes of an unintended pregnancy.

All medical procedures have some risk, and this is a fact of life that is often lost in stories about abortion. While abortion clearly carries some risk, there is also risk in carrying a child to term. While I don't have the research or data, I recall that the risk to the woman is greater in carrying a child to full term and giving birth. Abortion is the safer procedure in this regards.

And no, I don't think a clump of cells is life worth protecting. If you truly believe that, then I hope you are seriously anti-war and a vegan. Worse things are being done in your name than abortion.

To quote Tim B:

A call to " wipe Israel off the map" doesn't by any stretch of the imagination require a forced displacement of population, certainly no extermination. It can mean instead the reintegration of Palestine as a single state with the existing populations of the "Occupied Territories" and "Israel" coming together under a single, secular national umbrella.

I somehow highly doubt that the Islamic leaders would accept a secular state which gives equal weight to all religions and persons under secular law. The Koran is very clear on this matter - Islamic religious law cannot be subservient to any other law. Thus your idea of some national umbrella is deeply flawed.

I don't doubt the depth of religiously fuelled hatred of Israel many (most?) Muslims of the middle east harbour. I don't think any solution less than total death of Israel is acceptable. And this isn't just with so called extremists - this is a popular sentiment. After all, Iran isn't having another revolution to overthrow the religious government now are they?

I would like to give thanks to Eilonwy for the following comment:

I love how supposed intellectuals are scared off from engaging the Qur'an when they would not shy away from any other text. Are you so frightened of offending Muslims that you are willing to abandon critical inquiry and just accept 'experts' at their word? This stuff has serious political and social ramifications. Religious exegesis is not quantum physics. The latter is a still developing field which demands a knowledge of higher math, etc. accessible to only a few, the former requires some factual knowledge, consideration of human nature and a broad spectrum of opinions on what is a long-established religious text. An educated, thoughtful person should be able to form defensible conclusions based on the text itself rather than a political agenda.

This is a statement I agree with, and wish I wrote. The idea that religious doctrines and books are exempt from criticism from "ordinary" persons is a strange one indeed. This particular idea seems to be applied with a double-standard, after all, you don't really get in trouble for calling Mormonism silly, but make a few (generally true) statements about the Qur'an and one is found lacking in the "expert" department.

In my particular instance, I stated that the Qur'an states that Islamic holy law Sharia cannot be held under any other law. I don't think there are many Muslims who would dispute this, but regardless it is pretty easy to demonstrate this is a belief that is consistent with Islam.

Islam via the Qur'an and other texts professes to offer a complete world view that covers all religious, practical, political and monetary problems one may have. Google around for the "gold dinar" - a money system proposed by various Muslims to eventually eclipse and replace other dominant currencies. (Unfortunately for them, any gold-backed currency is destined to fail.) Given that the Qur'an is believed to be the infallible word of god, the laws provided are not really "regular" laws but believed to be superior to all other "human" laws - this is a common sentiment. I even have Muslim rap which mentions this in the lyrics:

"so how can a system from the creator of man coexist or be part of a man-made system"

From a lovely little tune called "No Compromise" by "The Soldiers of Allah".

I somehow doubt the faith of Jews under an Islamic state would be very nice. I also think realistically there is no hope in a secular state that is somehow externally enforced (since I doubt the participating people are interested in giving up their existing religious states). Such an enforced secularism probably won't survive long or do well. Looking at history, I also don't think some kind of spontaneous understanding and mutual compromise will forge a lasting peaceful area.