The government shouldn’t legislate morality. Because the question becomes who’s morality are they legislating? Christians? Muslims? Atheists? Conservatives? Liberals?
The role of government should be to step in and ensure individual rights are protected. Not to enforce some arbitrary sense of morality. That means they have no say over the day to day beliefs and morals of the population. The guiding principle of society should be “my right to swing my fist ends at your nose”. Governments should only step in when one individual violates the rights of another individual.
English
-
[quote]The government shouldn’t legislate morality. Because the question becomes who’s morality are they legislating? Christians? Muslims? Atheists? Conservatives? Liberals? The role of government should be to step in and ensure individual rights are protected. Not to enforce some arbitrary sense of morality. That means they have no say over the day to day beliefs and morals of the population. The guiding principle of society should be “my right to swing my fist ends at your nose”. Governments should only step in when one individual violates the rights of another individual.[/quote] How are those rights established? You’re just merely the apex species living on a pebble floating around in infinite space. Laws don’t encourage citizens to be better. What makes humanity different than the animals?
-
Edited by Uncanny_Vale: 4/19/2019 11:59:19 PM[quote]How are those rights established? [/quote] That’s easy. Rights are just a social contract. I agree not to steal your stuff if you agree not to steal mine. I agree to let you say what you want if you agree to let me say what I want. I agree not to harm you if you agree not to harm me. I agree to let you worship whatever god you want if you agree to let me worship whatever god I want. Laws are the codification of those agreements. [quote]You’re just merely the apex species living on a pebble floating around in infinite space. Laws don’t encourage citizens to be better. [/quote] Who said they did? Laws are there to prevent you from violating the rights agreed upon in the social contract. They are not there to make me a “better person”. That’s the job of ethics and morality. [quote]What makes humanity different than the animals?[/quote] Not a lot. The main difference is we have intelligence and consciousness to rationally examine our actions and how they effect others. We can rationally make decisions about what kind of a society we would like to create rather than just blindly following our base instincts.
-
[quote] That’s easy.[/quote] No. For you, and people like you most of all, it definitely should not be easy. You don’t ascribe to and hold to anything beyond yourself and your subjective understanding and experience. You are figuring out the foundation of rights from scratch, and to vet what is right and wrong should be a constant, ongoing struggle. That you deem it “easy” belittles the value of life, human life, and morality. [quote][quote]How are those rights established? [/quote] Rights are just a social contract. I agree not to steal your stuff if you agree not to steal mine. I agree to let you say what you want if you agree to let me say what I want. I agree not to harm you if you agree not to harm me. I agree to let you worship whatever god you want if you agree to let me worship whatever god I want. Laws are the codification of those agreements. [/quote] That’s only true for certain types of governments, such as Libertarian. There are states and countries-a-plenty that remove rights without fair trade-off. Banning of certain items, weapons, books... the murder of innocent children (taking from them the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). Those children aren’t treated as the humans they are, but as property. [quote][quote]You’re just merely the apex species living on a pebble floating around in infinite space. Laws don’t encourage citizens to be better. [/quote] Who said they did? Laws are there to prevent you from violating the rights agreed upon in the social contract. They are not there to make me a “better person”. That’s the job of ethics and morality. [/quote] Only not everyone agrees to the social contract, and many feel their rights are infringed upon. Ethics and morality dictate the laws legislated. If ethics and morality are neglected to be addressed and explored and defined, laws degrade and become more vague to allow more decadence, and the enforcement thereof either slacks off or becomes draconian. [quote][quote]What makes humanity different than the animals?[/quote] Not a lot. The main difference is we have intelligence and consciousness to rationally examine our actions and how they effect others.[/quote] Assuming you live in America, but probably applying to most countries, obviously humanity does not operate rationally consistently, and thus, they definitely do not examine themselves rationally either. [quote]We can rationally make decisions about what kind of a society we would like to create rather than just blindly following our base instincts.[/quote] Who’s the “we”? You aren’t being rational here. You’re speaking as if everyone shares the same values. Obviously that is not true. You live in a very divisive time. There are strong clashes of values. Case in point: you and I. And if you don’t ascribe to a higher power, you’ve nothing BUT your instincts to guide you. And you are very unaware of that because I know you did not realize that and you most definitely will not accept or admit that.
-
Edited by Uncanny_Vale: 4/20/2019 12:58:04 AMYou’re getting confused between rights and morality here. Rights are easy. Morality is not. So you are correct in saying morality is a difficult thing to establish. Which is why so many people disagree about them and why governments shouldn’t try to legislate them. Basically the government should be silent on morality. The government says you can do and believe whatever you like - so long as it doesn’t impede other people’s ability to do the same. The law says you can walk around your house buck naked covered in peanut butter, praising Satan if you wish. Just don’t violate anyone else’s freedoms in the process. The morality of praising Satan buck naked is a totally separate issue that should have nothing to do with the law.
-
[quote]You’re getting confused between rights and morality here. Rights are easy.[/quote] Obviously not. Wars have been fought over rights. Murders have occurred over rights. People have died. Rights and morality are closely connected: Rights are established by morality. [quote]Morality is not. So you are correct in saying morality is a difficult thing to establish. Which is why so many people disagree about them and why governments shouldn’t try to legislate them. [/quote] Are you ignoring that do many people clash because they disagree on rights? Abortion infringes upon the rights of unborn humans. The right to bear arms is still extremely controversial. [quote]Basically the government should be silent on morality. The government says you can do and believe whatever you like - so long as it doesn’t impede other people’s ability to do the same. The law says you can walk around your house buck naked covered in peanut butter, praising Satan if you wish. Just don’t violate anyone else’s freedoms in the process. The morality of praising Satan buck naked is a totally separate issue that should have nothing to do with the law.[/quote] Only, in reality, governments don’t do that.
-
[quote]Only, in reality, governments don’t do that.[/quote] My point is they should. Even if by some miracle you get 99% of the population to agree on morality - that still doesn’t give them the right to force that morality upon the 1% who don’t share those morals. That’s tyranny. What if the majority decided tomorrow that religion was immoral? And the government decided to tear up the constitution and declare religion illegal? Just because they thought it was immoral? That’s what the communist did after all. The constitution protects people’s rights (like freedom of religion for example). If you are going to allow governments to legislate morals then you are opening the door to all sorts of violations of people’s freedoms. Freedom means putting up with people who don’t share your world view, beliefs or morals. I don’t want the government deciding my morals for me. I don’t want to live under a religious theocracy thank you very much.
-
[[quote]quote]Only, in reality, governments don’t do that.[/quote] My point is they should. [/quote] But they don’t. If we’re going to talk about what should be, then everyone should always do only good, and never evil. [quote]Even if by some miracle you get 99% of the population to agree on morality - that still doesn’t give them the right to force that morality upon the 1% who don’t share those morals. That’s tyranny.[/quote] And yet, abortion has been forced upon millions of people, and you’re okay with supporting the right to infringe upon the rights of innocent others. That’s hypocrisy. [quote]What if the majority decided tomorrow that religion was immoral? And the government decided to tear up the constitution and declare religion illegal? Just because they thought it was immoral? That’s what the communist did after all. [/quote] Like I said: morality and rights go hand in hand, one unable to exist without the other. [quote]The constitution protects people’s rights (like freedom of religion for example). If you are going to allow governments to legislate morals then you are opening the door to all sorts of violations of people’s freedoms. Freedom means putting up with people who don’t share your world view, beliefs or morals. [/quote] Oh look: abortion violates people’s freedoms and rights. You can’t divorce human rights from morality without human rights eventually becoming infringed upon. That’s literally freedom without responsibility, and 1st world society is starting to implode. [quote]I don’t want the government deciding my morals for me. I don’t want to live under a religious theocracy thank you very much.[/quote] You already do, and you already do.
-
Why do you keep brining up abortion? Abortion laws are an example of my position. Allowing abortion means the moral choice is left up to the individual. Banning abortion means the government has made the moral choice for you. Like I said I am opposed to governments legislating morality. I find it surprising a conservative right wing Christian such as yourself would disagree. I thought you guys were all about small government. Legislating morality means that the government at any time can pass laws that conflict with your precious religious beliefs right? The government can force Christians to bake cakes for gay people for example. Or force you to use transgender pronouns. Or any number of laws that could conflict with the bible. Why would you want that? You see it works both ways. The government can pass morality laws you agree with, like anti-abortion laws for example. But it can just as easily pass laws you might not agree with - laws that go against the bible. Wouldn’t it be better for everyone if they stayed out of our morals altogether. Let everyone decide their own morals? I can’t believe you would want politicians deciding your morals for you? Do you want Bernie Sanders telling you what to believe?
-
[quote]Why do you keep brining up abortion? Abortion laws are an example of my position. Allowing abortion means the moral choice is left up to the individual. Banning abortion means the government has made the moral choice for you. [/quote] Because abortion is a prime example of morality and human rights being un-divorcible. Leaving the moral choice up to the individual infringes upon the life and human rights of the unborn child. [quote]Like I said I am opposed to governments legislating morality. I find it surprising a conservative right wing Christian such as yourself would disagree. I thought you guys were all about small government. Legislating morality means that the government at any time can pass laws that conflict with your precious religious beliefs right? The government can force Christians to bake cakes for gay people for example. Or force you to use transgender pronouns. Or any number of laws that could conflict with the bible. Why would you want that? [/quote] Without morality to guide legality, you have nothing to sustain freedom. [quote]You see it works both ways. The government can pass morality laws you agree with, like anti-abortion laws for example. But it can just as easily pass laws you might not agree with - laws that go against the bible. Wouldn’t it be better for everyone if they stayed out of our morals altogether.[/quote] They go hand in hand. Legislation is dictated by the morals of the people to make, pass, and enforce them. [quote]Let everyone decide their own morals? I can’t believe you would want politicians deciding your morals for you? Do you want Bernie Sanders telling you what to believe?[/quote] Sometimes morals infringe upon the morals of others. Only God decides what is moral or not. Yes, Bernie Sanders tell people what to believe.
-
Edited by Uncanny_Vale: 4/20/2019 6:34:18 AM[quote]Only God decides what is moral or not.[/quote] Lol this is exactly what I’m talking about. I don’t want you, Allah, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump or the Bible telling me what’s right and wrong. I’ll make that determination for myself thank you very much. [quote]My right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins.[/quote] - John Stuart Mill
-
[quote][quote]Only God decides what is moral or not.[/quote] Lol this is exactly what I’m talking about. I don’t want you, Allah, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump or the Bible telling me what’s right and wrong. I’ll make that determination for myself thank you very much. [/quote] Hitler and Stalin thought that way too, you know? [quote][quote]My right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins.[/quote] - John Stuart Mill[/quote] And yet you support abortion: the murder of children. You’re a very good actor, I’ll give you that.
-
[quote]Hitler and Stalin thought that way too, you know?[/quote] You’re doing a pretty good job arguing my case here. Hitler and Stalin are perfect examples of why governments [i]shouldn’t[/i] legislate morality. Individuals or groups shouldn’t have the power to force their morality upon others. Hitler and Stalin did exactly that. They forced their moral beliefs upon the rest of society. Individual rights and freedoms were trampled in the process. [quote]And yet you support abortion: the murder of children. You’re a very good actor, I’ll give you that.[/quote] I never said I support abortion. I think it’s morally wrong in most cases. But I don’t feel I or the government should have the right to force my moral beliefs onto others. The moral choice belongs to the individual. Not the government.
-
[quote][quote]Hitler and Stalin thought that way too, you know?[/quote] You’re doing a pretty good job arguing my case here.[/quote] How so? You said that you’d prefer to fall back on what you thought was right. I pointed out that Hitler and Stalin both said the very same thing. The flaw in your reasoning is that everyone doesn’t share the same morals and worldviews and perspectives on human rights, and many times those differences end up infringing upon the morals and rights of others. [quote]Hitler and Stalin are perfect examples of why governments [i]shouldn’t[/i] legislate morality. [/quote] Morality dictates legislation. You can’t divorce the two. [quote]Individuals or groups shouldn’t have the power to force their morality upon others. [/quote] Then you would prefer anarchy. [quote]Hitler and Stalin did exactly that. They forced their moral beliefs upon the rest of society. Individual rights and freedoms were trampled in the process. [/quote] You support abortion, which tramples individual rights and freedoms. [quote][quote]And yet you support abortion: the murder of children. You’re a very good actor, I’ll give you that.[/quote] I never said I support abortion. I think it’s morally wrong in most cases. But I don’t feel I or the government should have the right to force my moral beliefs onto others. The moral choice belongs to the individual. Not the government.[/quote] So you believe it’s up to the individual to decide if it’s okay to commit murder or not. You want to legalize murder?
-
[quote]How so? You said that you’d prefer to fall back on what you thought was right. I pointed out that Hitler and Stalin both said the very same thing. The flaw in your reasoning is that everyone doesn’t share the same morals and worldviews and perspectives on human rights, and many times those differences end up infringing upon the morals and rights of others.[/quote] It’s because everyone doesn’t share the same opinions on morality that they shouldn’t be legislated. If Hitler had respected other people’s right to have their own beliefs and morals then the holocaust and nàzi Germany would never of happened. He decided his views should be the law of the land - other people’s rights to have their own beliefs were trampled. That’s why you need a strong constitution based upon individual rights. A strong constitution that’s stops oppressive regimes from forcing their morals and beliefs on others. This is obvious isn’t it? [quote][quote]Individuals or groups shouldn’t have the power to force their morality upon others.[/quote] Then you would prefer anarchy.[/quote] No I would support a strong democracy based upon respect for individual freedoms and a constitution that prevents the government from trampling my rights and freedoms. The opposite of what you seem to be arguing for. [quote]You support abortion, which tramples individual rights and freedoms.[/quote] I’ve already said I don’t support abortion. But I don’t get to force my views on abortion into others.
-
[quote][quote]How so? You said that you’d prefer to fall back on what you thought was right. I pointed out that Hitler and Stalin both said the very same thing. The flaw in your reasoning is that everyone doesn’t share the same morals and worldviews and perspectives on human rights, and many times those differences end up infringing upon the morals and rights of others.[/quote] It’s because everyone doesn’t share the same opinions on morality that they shouldn’t be legislated.[/quote] And THAT’S my point. Morality dictates legislation. You can’t divorce the two. [quote]If Hitler had respected other people’s right to have their own beliefs and morals then the holocaust and nàzi Germany would never of happened. He decided his views should be the law of the land - other people’s rights to have their own beliefs were trampled.[/quote] That’s how every government works... [quote]That’s why you need a strong constitution based upon individual rights. A strong constitution that’s stops oppressive regimes from forcing their morals and beliefs on others. This is obvious isn’t it? [/quote] All governments require the forcing of morals and beliefs upon others to some degree. [quote][quote][quote]Individuals or groups shouldn’t have the power to force their morality upon others.[/quote] Then you would prefer anarchy.[/quote] No I would support a strong democracy based upon respect for individual freedoms and a constitution that prevents the government from trampling my rights and freedoms.[/quote] And yet, you are for mandatory vaccinations, or at least look down upon those who choose not to have vaccinations. [quote]The opposite of what you seem to be arguing for. [/quote] You don’t even know what I’m arguing for. [quote][quote]You support abortion, which tramples individual rights and freedoms.[/quote] I’ve already said I don’t support abortion.[/quote] If you’re not against abortion, you’re for it. [quote]But I don’t get to force my views on abortion into others.[/quote] You would legalize murder to leave it into the hands of the individual to carry out should they so wish?
-
This argument is going around in circles. If you want some kind of Handmaids Tale religious theocracy good for you. I’ll stick with my constitutionally protected individual freedoms thanks.
-
[quote]This argument is going around in circles.[/quote] No, just you. Especially since you aren’t willing to be intellectually honest. [quote]If you want some kind of Handmaids Tale religious theocracy good for you. [/quote] I never said that. And [u]you[/u] think yourself proficient enough to run the world. [quote]I’ll stick with my constitutionally protected individual freedoms thanks.[/quote] The constitution doesn’t protect your freedoms...
-
[quote]I never said that. And [u]you[/u] think yourself proficient enough to run the world.[/quote] Just have a think about what you’re saying here. You’re the one who’s arguing that morality should be legislated. Therefore [u]you[/u] think yourself proficient enough to run the world. My entire point has been that I don’t trust anyone - including myself - to run the world. Therefore I want whoever is in charge to have as little power over my morals and beliefs as possible. Government should not dictate my beliefs. I still find it weird that a right wing Christian would be arguing against this. I thought you guys believed god and the bible dictated your morals. Not the government. What if a government got in that didn’t believe in biblical morality? Then you’d be stuck with a whole bunch of laws that go against your Christian beliefs. Being forced to bake cakes for gays would just be the start. Which is why I’m advocating the government should stay out of our morals all together. But let me guess your fine with the government legislating morals as long as it’s your morals they are legislating - aka a religious theocracy.
-
[quote][quote]I never said that. And [u]you[/u] think yourself proficient enough to run the world.[/quote] Just have a think about what you’re saying here. You’re the one who’s arguing that morality should be legislated.[/quote] False. I never said that, neither have I said anything to even have implied that. I said that morality dictates legislation. [quote]Therefore [u]you[/u] think yourself proficient enough to run the world.[/quote] Nah. Never said that either. Only God is proficient enough to run the world. [quote]My entire point has been that I don’t trust anyone - including myself - to run the world. [/quote] And why is that? [quote]Therefore I want whoever is in charge to have as little power over my morals and beliefs as possible. Government should not dictate my beliefs. [/quote] And? [quote]I still find it weird that a right wing Christian would be arguing against this. I thought you guys believed god and the bible dictated your morals. Not the government. What if a government got in that didn’t believe in biblical morality? Then you’d be stuck with a whole bunch of laws that go against your Christian beliefs. Being forced to bake cakes for gays would just be the start. [/quote] Only God can define morality. Not you. Not me. Do you arguing against a caricature instead of actually arguing with me. [quote]Which is why I’m advocating the government should stay out of our morals all together. But let me guess your fine with the government legislating morals as long as it’s your morals they are legislating - aka a religious theocracy.[/quote] People run governments. People run governments according to their understanding of morality. Therefore government and legislation is dictated by morality, even a clash of morality is. You cannot escape how morality affects your life. You cannot escape how religion affects your life. What you believe is your worldview, and the symptoms of your worldview and your actions of it are your religion
-
[quote]Only God is proficient enough to run the world.[/quote] [quote]Only God can define morality.[/quote] You’re just repeating yourself for the sake of arguing now. Yes I get it you believe morals come from your god and your bible. Therefore laws should be based upon a book written by Bronze Age middle eastern goat herders 2000+ years ago. Great. Good for you. Too bad for Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, Hindus, and everyone else. Fortunately for the rest of us civilized folk there’s this little thing called the constitution that ensures separation of church and state.
-
[quote][quote]Only God is proficient enough to run the world.[/quote] [quote]Only God can define morality.[/quote] You’re just repeating yourself for the sake of arguing now. [/quote] No. I’m repeating because it applies and you’re just not getting it. [quote]Yes I get it you believe morals come from your god and your bible.[/quote] False. Morality is defined by God. [quote]Therefore laws should be based upon a book written by Bronze Age middle eastern goat herders 2000+ years ago. [/quote] Nah. It would be best if everyone lived in relationship with God and desired to do only good. [quote]Great. Good for you. Too bad for Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, Hindus, and everyone else. [/quote] Oh, Love is such a bad thing for you? Oh, poor you... [quote]Fortunately for the rest of us civilized folk there’s this little thing called the constitution that ensures separation of church and state.[/quote] You’re only civilized if you’re following God. The constitution doesn’t ensure anything, as demonstrated by the high rate of abortion. There’s no such thing as separation of Church and State. Atheism and Secularism are both religious, metaphysical worldviews. Nice try, hypocrite!
-
Now you’re just spouting religious dogma because you want the last word. When you can establish your god exists and that the bible is his word then you might have a case. Until then it’s just empty assertions. Good luck establishing your Christian taliban.
-
[quote]Now you’re just spouting religious dogma because you want the last word.[/quote] Look who’s talking, hypocrite. [quote]When you can establish your god exists and that the bible is his word then you might have a case.[/quote] Creation is evidence of God’s existence, and the Bible is His word not just because it actually happened, but because it offers the only valid answers for sin, evil, and suffering in this world. [quote]Until then it’s just empty assertions. Good luck establishing your Christian taliban.[/quote] So it’s not empty assertions. But here’s why it’s important to be mindful of what you say, which you are most definitely not: The word Taliban is Pashto, طالبان ṭālibān, meaning "students", the plural of ṭālib. If you’ve ever been a student among a group of other students, then Congratulations 🎈🎊🎉🍾 You were a part of a taliban.
-
[quote]Creation is evidence of God’s existence, and the Bible is His word not just because it actually happened, but because it offers the only valid answers for sin, evil, and suffering in this world.[/quote] “Creation” is evidence of god’s non-existence, and the Bible is not his word because it never actually happened, and it offers only in-valid answers for sin, evil, and suffering in this world. See how easy it is to just assert something as true. You don’t even need to prove anything. Just say it really confidently and pretend it’s true. Works every time right? [quote]The word Taliban is Pashto, طالبان ṭālibān, meaning "students", the plural of ṭālib. If you’ve ever been a student among a group of other students, then Congratulations 🎈🎊🎉🍾 You were a part of a taliban.[/quote] I don’t care what the words origins and meaning are. The reality is the Taliban were a bunch of religious fanatics determined to establish a theocracy based upon strict adhere to religious doctrine. There was no separation of church and state and no respect for individual freedoms. They decided what was moral according to their own religious beliefs and forced it upon others. With horrible consequences. They are the perfect example of why morality (especially religious morality) should not be legislated as law. Like I said, if you are in favor of legislating “god’s morality” as law then you are putting yourself in the same camp as the taliban. Good luck with that.
-
[quote][quote]Creation is evidence of God’s existence, and the Bible is His word not just because it actually happened, but because it offers the only valid answers for sin, evil, and suffering in this world.[/quote] “Creation” is evidence of god’s non-existence, and the Bible is not his word because it never actually happened, and it offers only in-valid answers for sin, evil, and suffering in this world. [/quote] Creation is evidence of God’s existence, and the Bible is His word not just because it actually happened, but because it offers the only valid answers for sin, evil, and suffering in this world. [quote]See how easy it is to just assert something as true. You don’t even need to prove anything. Just say it really confidently and pretend it’s true. Works every time right?[/quote] You tell me since you have such a habit of doing it. [quote][quote]The word Taliban is Pashto, طالبان ṭālibān, meaning "students", the plural of ṭālib. If you’ve ever been a student among a group of other students, then Congratulations 🎈🎊🎉🍾 You were a part of a taliban.[/quote] I don’t care what the words origins and meaning are. The reality is the Taliban were a bunch of religious fanatics determined to establish a theocracy based upon strict adhere to religious doctrine. [/quote] You conveniently left out the fact that they were Muslim extremists. Very different that Christian extremists. But hey, you just like to generalize. [quote]There was no separation of church and state and no respect for individual freedoms. [/quote] Kind of like you. No respect of the freedoms of the unborn. No separation of State and the church of your personal doctrines. [quote]They decided what was moral according to their own religious beliefs and forced it upon others. [/quote] Like you do now. Supporting the right of the individual to choose to murder or not. [quote]With horrible consequences. They are the perfect example of why morality (especially religious morality) should not be legislated as law. [/quote] As are you, amusingly. Morality is always legislated. [quote]Like I said, if you are in favor of legislating “god’s morality” as law then you are putting yourself in the same camp as the taliban. Good luck with that.[/quote] As are you, hypocrite.