Morality isn't refering to murder. It is a reference to personal choices people do to themselves.
Like for example....what two adults do in their bedroom at night.
2006-08-31 02:29:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by Villain 6
·
3⤊
1⤋
Not to be mean, but it is flat out stupidity, mixed a great deal with denial and hypocrisy.
Denial, in that no one wants to admit our Nation is run by the moral as well as ideological premises of someone else (whatever political party happens to be in power at the time).
Stupidity, in that those who claim morality can not be legislated refuse to see what is so plainly obvious to everyone else who live in the real world.
Hypocrisy in that, The Supreme Court decision allowing Abortion is, in a sense, legislating morality for a certain smaller portion of society while totally ignoring the morality of a larger portion of society. Somehow, those who support abortion or other debated issues of our day and that have been protected by the courts and by some legislatures conveniently look over that fact.
As long as these people are getting what they want, then legislating morality is commendable and acceptable and therefore applauded.
****************
I would like to take the time to point out that morality has been legislated in our nation's past, either much to our delight or much to our chagrin, and will continue to be legislated in our future.
Every law that forbids murder, stealing, forgery, and any other act or acts made illegal (I should also include an act or group of acts not made illegal) as a result of a law passed by Congress and some states legislature and then signed by the President or a state's governor is a legislated moral judgment made by someone else. Just because we as a society agree that these acts are or are not wrong does not mean that these acts are exempt from being called legislated morality.
I close this question with a question: Aren't you glad The Continental Congress didn't decide we could not legislate morality and vote against the Constitution or the acceptance of the declaration of Independence? (If you know your history, then you know there were those who opposed breaking from England, and making an independent Nation.)
2006-08-31 02:45:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by bowtierodz 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
"No legislating morality" is in reference to a number of things that people have/would like to make illegal, typically based upon religious grounds. Most of these would include the so-called victimless crimes (such as prostitution, drug use, etc), along with the "blue laws" (can't sell alchohol on Sunday, etc.) While the first can be argued to have a societal reason (however tenuous), the second typically lacks even that, and merely comes down to interpretation of religious directives. This becomes an issue because it forces people who do not practice that religion to abide by that religion's non-secular strictures.
2006-08-31 03:14:14
·
answer #3
·
answered by ArcadianStormcrow 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
We legislate stealing, killing, and fraud and stuff because that is the bare minimum to keep order in society. If they were legal, we would not have a right to life or property, because anyone could just walk up and take them.
However, we can't say the same thing about sex or sunday keeping. Individual religious choices should be left that way.
Re: abortion, to the guy below me. If you leave abortion the way it is, it doesn't force people to have abortions. It makes it their choice. Whereas, if you legislate against it, it removes the freedom of choice. Therefore, the previous is the lesser evil to freedom.
Now, if you could prove to me that a fetus has a soul, then I might have to give on that issue. But in general, I believe that God created man as an intelligent being, with the right to choose for themselves--that's why we had the garden of Eden. If God thinks we should have the right to choose for ourselves, who are we to take away that right from someone else?
Hence, "thou shalt not legislate religion."
2006-08-31 02:31:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by Robert 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
You are equating two different types of morality. There is one that has the potential to harm those that do not desire to participate and then there are those activities that will only harm those that CHOOSE to participate.
The things that are being referred to in "No legislating morality" are those activities that have the potential to harm ONLY those that participate FREELY and with the knowledge that there is the potential for harm to occur.
It is your logic that is flawed here, not those that want the freedom to do as they wish as long as, there is no harm caused to others that are not freely participating. In other words as long as those that are not willing participants incur no harm to their life, limb, and/or liberty then everyone should be free to do as they wish.
2006-08-31 03:07:54
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋