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.
Many posters on here seem to feel that morality should be completely removed from the law.
I'm curious - just how do you think that is possible? And how do you think we could avoid the mass anarchy, chaos, and lawlessness associated with not enforcing some form of basic moral code?
You cannot remove morality from the law, because all laws are morality-based.
I find it interesting that most people who want morality removed from the law are only being half honest. They want morality that they don't like removed from the law. All other morality-based laws, they want to remain.
I think laws need to be pushed out to prevent large scale social negatives without making a large negative for the individual. The problem I see with doing it as morality is who's morality do we legislate? Most people agree on the big things...people shouldn't be going around murdering, assaulting, stealing. From the big things people start to differ on opinion on what is moral or immoral.
Some people believe it's immoral not to tithe, do we enforce the law they are correct and make their position moral...or the opposite as legally moral. Ask Tom Cruise and he will say that taking pharmaceuticals is immoral and they don't work, do we legislate as he believes or as hundreds of millions of other people do that they do work. A bit on the extreme example side, but I think if morals are legislated you have to take the big with the small...it applies for one and all.
You do not legislate morality. You legislate social behavior, and then call it morality.
Laws are not all morality based. The law that I have to put license plates on my car every year is not morality based. The law that I have to make an appointment with a doctor to get a new Rx when my refills run out is not morality based. The law that you can sell candy but not roses on a street corner in Louisiana is not morality based. The three-strikes law in California is not morality based. The law that the USA goes on daylight savings time three weeks before the rest of the world is not morality based. The law that an absentee ballot must bear a legible postmark is not morality based.
afoi, are we really going to have to go over this again ??? I don't know whether to laugh or cry
Your rule by majority thread was a bit different from this one. It stirred up an argument over the Constitution, judicial review, and some other things I don't recall.
I just want to hear some perspectives from libertarians.
The way I see it...the federal government needs to butt out of state and local laws and allow states, counties, cities, etc. to develop their own "moral codes" and decide what should be a part of the law.
Without enforcing a moral code that goes beyond theft, assault, murder, rape, etc., those crimes will go up and our quality of life will go down.
That said, the majority in a more local area should be permitted to decide what should be a part of this moral code.
I intended this thread to at least somewhat discuss states' rights (certainly NOT the feds' rights) to impose moral codes on its citizens.
I think everyone can agree that stuff like robbery, murder, rape, etc are all morally wrong. Stuff like gay marriage, drugs, polygamy, and things like that you can't really legislate.
Just my two cents...
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.