U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Missouri > Kansas City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-13-2012, 09:35 AM
 
Location: St. Louis
7,041 posts, read 5,072,902 times
Reputation: 4045

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by skrizzle View Post
I love how these small government, conservative republicans want to have the government get in citizens personal business and force their opinions of morality on other people.... completely hypocritical.
I don't really have a dog in this fight, but at some level, all laws are an expression of morality.

Just curious if you support any of the following:

Stricter gun laws.
Higher income taxes.
Higher minimum wage laws.
Making same sex marriages legal.
Smoking bans.
Passing laws to mandate increased public funding for embryonic stem cell research.
Issuing executive orders to mandate employers cover birth control pills.
Abortion on demand.
Passing federal laws that mandate individuals must purchase health insurance.

I would suggest liberals love to "...have the government get in citizens personal business and force their opinions of morality on other people."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-13-2012, 09:41 AM
 
Location: Tower Grove East, St. Louis, MO
12,064 posts, read 27,216,465 times
Reputation: 3739
^I think it's pretty easy to argue that, for a great deal of those you posted above, it is the lack of such laws that is the pushing of morality.

Allowing any two consentual adults to marry is not an expression of morality while, in fact, not allowing it is.

And seriously? "Abortion on demand" is how you chose to frame that argument? That's not exactly intellectually above board is it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2012, 09:49 AM
 
Location: St. Louis
7,041 posts, read 5,072,902 times
Reputation: 4045
Quote:
Originally Posted by aragx6 View Post
^I think it's pretty easy to argue that, for a great deal of those you posted above, it is the lack of such laws that is the pushing of morality.

Allowing any two consentual adults to marry is not an expression of morality while, in fact, not allowing it is.

And seriously? "Abortion on demand" is how you chose to frame that argument? That's not exactly intellectually above board is it?
These are simply examples, but yes, all involve expressions of morality in the form of laws or other legislation or executive action that are being forced onto others in certain situations who may not share the same view point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2012, 09:57 AM
 
Location: Tower Grove East, St. Louis, MO
12,064 posts, read 27,216,465 times
Reputation: 3739
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUTGR View Post
These are simply examples, but yes, all involve expressions of morality in the form of laws or other legislation or executive action that are being forced onto others in certain situations who may not share the same view point.
No, they don't. I am not forcing you to marry a man, only allowing others to do so. One is an expression of morality that strips away freedoms/rights; one is pretty clearly not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2012, 10:05 AM
 
Location: St. Louis
7,041 posts, read 5,072,902 times
Reputation: 4045
Quote:
Originally Posted by aragx6 View Post
No, they don't. I am not forcing you to marry a man, only allowing others to do so. One is an expression of morality that strips away freedoms/rights; one is pretty clearly not.
You are forcing society to recognize a status of a union that traditionally has not had that status. Many people that comprise that society have an issue with this and you are forcing them to accept a status that they don't necessarily agree with or support. You are doing this because of a morality judgment you make that many don't share.

By the way, I'm a bit of a libertarian and I personally am not too hung up on this issue. I used this issue simply as one of several examples to show how laws contain expressions of morality. I'm not personally passing judgment on this particular issue.

If I did, my sister would disown me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2012, 10:15 AM
 
Location: St. Louis
7,041 posts, read 5,072,902 times
Reputation: 4045
Quote:
Originally Posted by aragx6 View Post
No, they don't. I am not forcing you to marry a man, only allowing others to do so. One is an expression of morality that strips away freedoms/rights; one is pretty clearly not.
By the way, we have an entire Bill of Rights which basically expresses what the Government cannot do. As Obama famously remarked, they are essentially "negative" rights, i.e. the government cannot do this or do that. I'm not sure anyone would suggest that the Bill of Rights are not an expression of morality even though they do not force individuals to do something or preclude them from doing something.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2012, 10:46 AM
 
Location: Tower Grove East, St. Louis, MO
12,064 posts, read 27,216,465 times
Reputation: 3739
^Fair enough and I see your point (though it's pretty cerebral and not that central to the day-to-day functions of our society IMO)

Sounds like we're in somewhat the same boat, but gay rights is a real touchy subject for me as it directly affects many members of my (and my fiance's -- so my soon-to-be) family.

And again, we could argue until the cows come home about this issue, but if my choices as an American are to;

A. "Force" someone to recognize a status with which they don't agree (and again has no real bearing on their day-to-day life), or

B. Neglect our very real and storied responsibilties as a free country to treat everyone fairly and equally,

well that's a pretty darn easy choice for me.

I'm not sure that using the fact that we've been historically doing something unfair as a reason for continuing it that way makes very much sense at all -- but, to me, that's the very essence of progressivism. Looking critically at what we're doing and moving forward in a way that makes the most sense.

The hyprocrisy of "small-government" conservatives on this issue in particular is frankly baffling.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2012, 08:13 PM
 
Location: St. Louis
7,041 posts, read 5,072,902 times
Reputation: 4045
Quote:
Originally Posted by aragx6 View Post
^Fair enough and I see your point (though it's pretty cerebral and not that central to the day-to-day functions of our society IMO)

Sounds like we're in somewhat the same boat, but gay rights is a real touchy subject for me as it directly affects many members of my (and my fiance's -- so my soon-to-be) family.

And again, we could argue until the cows come home about this issue, but if my choices as an American are to;

A. "Force" someone to recognize a status with which they don't agree (and again has no real bearing on their day-to-day life), or

B. Neglect our very real and storied responsibilties as a free country to treat everyone fairly and equally,

well that's a pretty darn easy choice for me.

I'm not sure that using the fact that we've been historically doing something unfair as a reason for continuing it that way makes very much sense at all -- but, to me, that's the very essence of progressivism. Looking critically at what we're doing and moving forward in a way that makes the most sense.

The hyprocrisy of "small-government" conservatives on this issue in particular is frankly baffling.

You're are an excellent poster and although we come from different ends of the polictal spectrum I respect what you are saying. Falling on my sword over gay rights was not a good idea--it's simply not an issue I feel strong about. My only point is both sides have no problem telling the other what to do--I understand you disagree. In any event, you've made me think harder about a few things -- so thanks for that! In other words, I'll quit while I'm behind!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2012, 09:35 AM
 
Location: Tower Grove East, St. Louis, MO
12,064 posts, read 27,216,465 times
Reputation: 3739
^I have always respected your contributions to the forums, regardless of our (often) differing opinions, and appreciate the kind words.

Every once in a while I read something I wrote back in 2007 when I joined this forum and can barely recognize my stance -- my point being that I've always enjoyed C-D as a place where I can form (and reform as necessary) my own ideas. That is a big part of why I've stuck around for so long!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2012, 11:59 AM
 
Location: CasaMo
15,296 posts, read 7,151,642 times
Reputation: 16384
Quote:
Originally Posted by aragx6 View Post
Every once in a while I read something I wrote back in 2007 when I joined this forum and can barely recognize my stance
Same here. I've done the same thing. I've sort of calmed down over the years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Missouri > Kansas City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top