If the Europeans Had Not Settled the New World?

For some reason, this question crossed my mind recently. If the Incas in Peru, the Aztecs in Mexico, and the American Indians had not been conquered by the Europeans, nor any other culture, and essentially been left alone, what do you think the state of these areas would be like now? Do you think that the Native American Indians would still be living as they were when the Europeans arrived? Would the Aztecs still be engaged in human sacrifice?

Richard, I sent a friend of mine a text, asking him this question. Regarding the Aztec human sacrifice, he compared it  to the countless abortions that occur each year in the US.

Every month an egg that is a living thing is destroyed along with other tissue and millions of living cells by the menustration cycle in women,and sperm is periodically reabsorped  by the male body by the millions ,meaning destroyed,this  destruction is biological designed in the scheme of things,so what's the differance if we design things to our needs?each day on earth billions upon billions of living things meet there death thru predation, accident,some in the most horrible ,blood curdling painful ways the suffering bestowed on us is mind boggling this is what we have been given to work with,

Originally Posted by Darian Rachal

For some reason, this question crossed my mind recently. If the Incas in Peru, the Aztecs in Mexico, and the American Indians had not been conquered by the Europeans, nor any other culture, and essentially been left alone, what do you think the state of these areas would be like now? Do you think that the Native American Indians would still be living as they were when the Europeans arrived? Would the Aztecs still be engaged in human sacrifice?

Probabaly,that was their relegion,as long as they were successful what would be the need to change?

Originally Posted by thomas zukouski

Probabaly,that was their relegion,as long as they were successful what would be the need to change?

In responding to both of your postings above (which I realize were posted years back), and your statement saying "what would be the need to change", I would offer up this for your consideration.

How about thinking that the need for the group of individuals is that they might want to evolve into a civilized society?

Another factor to consider is perhaps the inhumanity of it all?  That factors in for me personally.  

Also, regarding Darian's statement that countless abortions occur each year, and your to your mention that the female human body sometimes spontaneously aborts a baby, along with the fact that each month eggs are produced by females and the body discards them naturally, I don't see the moral/immoral correlation there with abortions conducted by humans to purposely kill a baby/fetus.  

Maybe I'm missing your point?  Because a female human body discards unfertilized eggs once per month, does that mean that purposely aborting a fertilized egg or a baby at various periods of the gestational cycle amounts to a moral relevance or permittance by man?

I see no relevance there, if you are trying to compare the 2 separate occurrences there, one being a natural bodily function, and a purposeful killing of a baby in the womb.

Should we accept murder simply because some people do it, in fits of rage, and others commit murder when it is planned by a criminal killer?

Many things happen or occur naturally in life, but that doesn't mean we should accept these things if done purposely by others.