Perfection
The Great Head.
Why the heck is that a neccesity?
Governments and moral issues
- Thread starter otago
- Start date
Trajan12
Deity
A random suicide, yes. But I think if a person were to go to a designated and licensed Euthanasia clinic, sign the correct papers, and wait a specified amount of time to give them a chance to change their minds, they have the right to die.
Syterion
Voodoo Economist
The government has no right to legislate over actions from a personal choice with no victim, for example, sodomy, or committing race betrayal.
BasketCase
Username sez it all
The boldface word is where you went wrong.
Capiche?BasketCase having to quote HIMSELF to set things straight said:
BasketCase
Username sez it all
Sodomy produces AIDS, AIDS results in hospitalization, and with today's socialized medical system, the person who ends up paying for the hospitalization is ME. Making me the victim.
Next contestant?
Syterion
Voodoo Economist
I wasn't aware that AIDS was caused by sodomy. The more you know...
I think the government should be as close to the people as possible, and so I prefer a number of governmental layers, each with different types of authority.
Of course, I also like it when regional governments take pains to make their legislations similar when possible, just to aid travellers.
Of course, I also like it when regional governments take pains to make their legislations similar when possible, just to aid travellers.
BasketCase
Username sez it all
But I'm already talking about legislating morality. And you can't stop me.
I'm a child molester, bud (well, okay, that's not actually true, but you'll get the point in a second). Now, if I say "Child molesting is flat-out wrong" does that make me a liar? Does that mean child molesting is morally acceptable?
NO.
How is this evil? Right now there's an implicit gun pointing at you, Berzerker, if you blow up a bus station with a pipe bomb full of nails. Blow up a bus station, and I'm all for putting you in the electric chair. Hell, I'll pull the lever myself. I even brought marshmallows.
I told you, dude--the important thing isn't government making laws that control your life. The important thing is HOW government controls your life. What laws is government passing? That's the rub.
Yo, Greenpeace, are you reading this??
I called this one perfectly: PEOPLE DISAGREEING ON THE DEFINITION OF HARM.
Berzerker
Deity
Cuz it aint moral to threaten people for their money
BasketCase
Username sez it all
On the other hand, if you pay the laborer a wage they find acceptable, then the exchange is fair.
America is not "taking their labor". Part of the U.S. did in fact trade in slaves once, but we put a stop to that.
Berzerker
Deity
Sodomy produces AIDS, AIDS results in hospitalization, and with today's socialized medical system, the person who ends up paying for the hospitalization is ME. Making me the victim.
Next contestant?
Guns produce wounds, and wounds cost me money
Sports produce injuries, and injuries cost me money
(fill in the blank) produces (fill in the blank) and that costs me money
BC, the person with AIDS aint the one making me pay for their health care, thats politicians so yer blaming another victim instead of the people responsible and there wouldn't be much at all legal if we used your argument consistently, ie its a lousy argument oozing with hypocrisy.
Berzerker
Deity
You think taxes are fair? The US taxes labor and it aint voluntary - dont even try to compare taxation with the labor market
BasketCase
Username sez it all
It was never my argument.BC, the person with AIDS aint the one making me pay for their health care, thats politicians so yer blaming another victim instead of the people responsible and there wouldn't be much at all legal if we used your argument consistently, ie its a lousy argument oozing with hypocrisy.
It was Syterion's.
BasketCase
Username sez it all
Yes it is. I could simply quit my current job and take some other job under the table, and never pay taxes again. I find the taxes I'm paying to be fair and acceptable. Not heavenly, but I can deal with it. I choose to accept it.
Plus I never voted for or against it in any of the past three federal elections.
Berzerker
Deity
I think governments should draw the line when the moral imperative of the law outweighs societal benefit of enforcement. To put it another way, when enforcing the law becomes about upholding someone's concept of correct morals and not about fostering a healthy, peaceful and functioning society.
E.g.: murder. You cannot have a functional society when people can kill each other. One could easily make a completely amoral argument as to why murder should be illegal.
Child Molestation, a common topic brought up by people that argue for legislating morality, can also remain illegal without consideration of morals. It is a health and safety issue. Even polygamy can remain illegal. The foundations of polygamy lie in a predominantly male dominated world where women are treated as property. Making it illegal protects the health and safety of women, as well as protecting the civil liberties of women's freedoms; hence, no need to enforce morals there either. (Not saying one way or the other whether I think it should be legal or not, just showing examples of how I think about it)
Crossing the line? Gay marriage; in my humble opinion there are no societal benefits to Government regulation of this. To me this is a perfect example of crossing the line between fostering the health and safety of citizens and just making up rules because people find something uncomfortable.
Unfortunately my arguments can be used against me in areas where I disagree with current policy, such as with drugs. But I would counter that a) drug use should, if at all, be treated as a health problem; and b) drug regulation does not mean making them illegal; harmful health effects of drug abuse can be countered with a consistent and effective regulatory scheme coupled with the recognition of drug abuse as a health issue and not a criminal one. (And I am not advocating all drugs should be legalized, just that current policy looks at it the wrong way and you can remove the moral component from the law).
/end rant
//good discussion idea though
E.g.: murder. You cannot have a functional society when people can kill each other. One could easily make a completely amoral argument as to why murder should be illegal.
Child Molestation, a common topic brought up by people that argue for legislating morality, can also remain illegal without consideration of morals. It is a health and safety issue. Even polygamy can remain illegal. The foundations of polygamy lie in a predominantly male dominated world where women are treated as property. Making it illegal protects the health and safety of women, as well as protecting the civil liberties of women's freedoms; hence, no need to enforce morals there either. (Not saying one way or the other whether I think it should be legal or not, just showing examples of how I think about it)
Crossing the line? Gay marriage; in my humble opinion there are no societal benefits to Government regulation of this. To me this is a perfect example of crossing the line between fostering the health and safety of citizens and just making up rules because people find something uncomfortable.
Unfortunately my arguments can be used against me in areas where I disagree with current policy, such as with drugs. But I would counter that a) drug use should, if at all, be treated as a health problem; and b) drug regulation does not mean making them illegal; harmful health effects of drug abuse can be countered with a consistent and effective regulatory scheme coupled with the recognition of drug abuse as a health issue and not a criminal one. (And I am not advocating all drugs should be legalized, just that current policy looks at it the wrong way and you can remove the moral component from the law).
/end rant
//good discussion idea though
Berzerker
Deity
The fact you can quit and violate the laws dont make taxes voluntary.
You just claimed you were a victim because you are paying for the health care of people with AIDS, now taxes are fair?
Will they be fair if Obama gets his way?
How much income would I currently have if my parents & grandparents hadn't paid taxes?
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,377
Yes, I understand you never understood that a government body is no more that a large organization with some useful claims to legitimacy to rule.
Berzerker
Deity
Talk (or dream) about it all you want, legislating morality is an oxy moron.
What does this have to do with how governments operate?
Walk around threatening people with guns and see if they think yer moral.
Right now there's an implicit gun pointing at you, Berzerker, if you blow up a bus station with a pipe bomb full of nails. Blow up a bus station, and I'm all for putting you in the electric chair. Hell, I'll pull the lever myself. I even brought marshmallows.
Dont change the subject again, we were talking about taxes and labor. Now you've turned us all into murderers with your argument.
The debate is about government and morality and I said government cannot legislate morality and you disagree. Repeating what you consider the rub aint relevant to our debate.
Gee, no one would have ever figured that out if you didn't come along to enlighten us heathens.
Similar threads
