Legislated morality
- Thread starter milefile
- 131 comments
- 3,279 views
Danoff
Premium
- 34,103
- Mile High City
Judges should be motivated by the U.S. legal code and a little common sense. Thats it, nothing else. There should be no other influence whatsoever and if they cant manage to pull that off than they have no business being a judge. If this guy cant manage to keep the 10 commandments and religion out of his work then he has no business serving the country and laying down judgment on the various Atheists, Agnostics, Pagans, Muslims and Buddhists that we have living in this country.
He absolutely must be able to separate his religious beliefs from his judgment if he is to maintain the separation of church and state that has benefited our country so much over the last 200 years (to the extent that weve been able to pull it off). Displaying the 10 commandments in his courtroom is a symptom of his inability to separate religion from law.
I actually think Dukes example of putting up a soviet flag would be more appropriate than the 10 commandments (although I personally find it much more offensive).
Danoff
Premium
- 34,103
- Mile High City
I named a way that religious people tell me what to do, not ways that the government tells me what to do.
I was estabilshing the fact that religious people often feel the need to tell others how to live their lives. My point was that it is unacceptable that religious people then try to get the government to help them tell others what to do.
- 10,832
For instance, the gay Texas couple who were having sex in their own bedroom when the police erroneously entered their apartment in response to a domestic disturbance that was in another apartment. The cops saw the sex and arrested them both because "sodomy" is illegal. So the cops can stumble into the wrong apartment but still nab you for engaging in a consentual act between two adults. That's what I'm talking about.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,103
- Mile High City
I'm not saying that any religious person telling me what to do is something I think the government should do something about, quite the contrary actually. Religious people should be able to try to get their message out, that's fine. My problem is using the government to do it. When they try to get the government to force poeple to be moral, that's when things go south. (Notice I didn't say succeed).
My original statement was that religious people seem to be constantly telling others what to do. I stand by that. You wanted an example of them telling me what to do, I gave you one.
The result of them telling others what to do is that they have begun to seek the government's assistance in doing so.
My original statement was that religious people seem to be constantly telling others what to do. I stand by that. You wanted an example of them telling me what to do, I gave you one.
The result of them telling others what to do is that they have begun to seek the government's assistance in doing so.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,103
- Mile High City
I vote. That's not a problem. We're discussing whether something is right or not. We're discussing the ethics of legislated morality. That's not whining, it's a debate. I'm claiming that it is unethical to legislate morality. Are you claiming that it is ethical? Because if not, then we have nothing to talk about really.
Who's making you pay for abortions? Can I see some stats?
- 10,832
I written letters, too, to John Shaddeg. One was about the numerous tax exemptions in AZ, and how they will cut education and state emloyees salaries before they will charge tax on a prostitute or a haircut for your dog. The other was about this "Total Information Awareness" nonsense.
Similar threads
