View Poll Results: Yes or No?

Voters
53. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    10 18.87%
  • No

    37 69.81%
  • Other

    6 11.32%
Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 81 to 85 of 85

Thread: Should the government legislate morality?

  1. #81
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Ft. Worth, TX
    Last Seen
    10-27-11 @ 08:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    132

    Re: Should the government legislate morality?

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    The government should not legislate morality. The government should legislate behavior which harms other people without their consent. That covers not only the obvious crimes of violence, but also acts of fraud, theft, vandelism, contractual violations, etc. These are society laws.

    The government should not legislate "moral" behavior such as sexual orientation, forced church attendance, specific systems of belief (religious or otherrwise), any behavior between consenting adults, or victimless behavior, like prostitution and use of drugs, alcohol or tobacco (although the government can certainly legislate the consequence of recklessly abusing these substances, creating potential harm to others in the process).
    Agreed with your excellent post. Note that past efforts by government to legislate morality have always ended badly. Political Correctness is an outgrowth of the idea.

  2. #82
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,705

    Re: Should the government legislate morality?

    Well, even times beginning with Hammurabi made morality law. I also do not like moral relativism, as I see it as a pernicious force in public life.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  3. #83
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,596

    Re: Should the government legislate morality?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dezaad View Post
    You emphasize a different phrase, and I agree with you they there state the purpose of government. I would also draw people's attention to the phrase I have highlighted. The one where the give a rationale for the justification for creating laws. It is just social contract theory. A theory requiring no moral justification in it's application.
    It is the right of the people to make such laws as they deem necessary to affect (presumably positively) their safety and happiness. The question is, when it comes to laws enforcing someone's moral code, should they do so? I say no. If an action does not impinge on the liberty of others, then it shouldn't be outlawed. Some people do make poor choices, as we all know, but should the government try to make those choices for them? Every time they've tried, it has come out badly.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  4. #84
    Sleeper Agent
    iamitter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    NY, NY
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 01:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    1,836

    Re: Should the government legislate morality?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Well, even times beginning with Hammurabi made morality law. I also do not like moral relativism, as I see it as a pernicious force in public life.
    Could you expand upon your thoughts on relativism? I've always been a moral relativist and I've yet to see anything like it be a 'pernicious' force in life.
    Give a man a fish, or he will destroy the only existing vial of antidote.

  5. #85
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,512

    Re: Should the government legislate morality?

    Quote Originally Posted by Walter View Post
    Just why do you ASSUME that it is CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATE that 75% of the populous must AGREE upon any et.al., incorporations of LAW that fundamentally changes the founding principles of this nation? Every Law that comes into existence is legislated by MAJORITY rule. There is not one fundamental basic human right that is guaranteed in this nation that did not come from a super majority ratification process (endorsed by THE PEOPLE, the only authority that regulates rights in this nation), Big Brother did not institute one right in this Nation....not one, unless they did so, UNCONSTITUTIONALLY from the bench. But now, some are claiming that the same Majority that granted all Civil and Minority rights of human civility are bigoted and racist? Really?

    This is a Constitutional Democratic Republic. All rights are regulated by the Majority Will...it can be no other way. Hell, even Mr. Obama realizes the truth to that statement....listen, be enlightened. The People write the laws by a reflection of the morality they already possess. Even the Constitution was drafted by using the philosophy of the Judeo/Christian faith, as the Black Stone theories were deeply referenced in establishing the judicial system of this nation. Do you think that its just happenstance that 80% of the population profess to being Christian?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3s6BmRvhl.pw

    Commentaries on the Laws of England - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    I don't feel that you and Goshin understood my statement as I intended it to be, so I'll use and example.

    Slavery.... the majority of people in America once supported slavery, and civil rights also required a fight against the majority of Americans at one time too. If you look into the history of slavery, you'd see that slave owners and preachers used bible passages to support slavery and morally justify it.

    Christianity and History: Bible, Race & Slavery

    Christianity and slavery - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    A boy, Emmett Till, was even murdered and his murders got away with the crime... and that was once a popular and acceptable decision the legal system made.

    Goshin argued, "all laws are oppressive to someone," and I disagree. Laws are not oppressive to the ruling class. Iraqi laws were not oppressive to Saddam Hussein or his sons. The Nazi Regime didn't oppress Hitler or anybody in his party. It's the same in Iran, North Korea, and in any country where the government denies the people freedom, liberty, or tortures them.

    The people in those countries who benefited and stuffed their pockets with money made off the backs of the people they exploited didn't decry colonialism or slavery, or support topping Saddam Hussein or the USSR... and they aren't in the streets rioting in Egypt now.

    I also think that most people are utilitarian... they will consciously make an immoral decision, if they reason that the end justifies the means. I don't try to see the world in absolutes...

    But oppression as I am describing and talking about is immoral IMO... and when the law upholds one group's view of morality and doing so oppresses another group, then that government is not moral. It doesn't matter if the majority thinks it's right or acceptable, or the majority has the power to impose their will by force.

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •