Laws are established to keep society from collapsing on itself correct? They are there to make sure the world can function and progress, that is their nature. So when you start making laws about things that have nothing to do with anything besides your personal beliefs, or anyone's personal beliefs, it starts to get arbitary. Sure it's not against our constitution or any laws, but can't you just see it's wrong? Don't you feel bad about making some one else less happy just so your views are secure and you feel warm and fuzzy inside? It's not a matter of legality for me, it's a matter of being a considerate compassionate human being. Why can't some people just have their own views and be happy, why do they have to make sure everyone else is subjected to their way of thinking (this goes for the overbearing atheists too)?
My point is, laws aren't there to make you happy, they're there to make sure you aren't raped, mugged, or murdered and we can progress as a society. Right?
2006-09-02 08:14:25 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
For example abortion and gay marriage. I'm sure your God/god/gods don't like it, so don't do it. It's not legally wrong to impose those views onto others but at least to me it is thically wrong to impose my own views on other people. This is a kind of plea for peace I guess.
2006-09-02 08:16:19 · update #1
To retiredslashsomethingsomething, I'm not sure exactly what your point is but I think I disagree, but not for sexist issues. I think that if a man gets a women pregnant then he made a choice and by all means should help pay the conciquences. Sex is a mutual decision and just because the woman has to bare the baby doesn't mean she should be the only one who has to pay to keep it alive.
2006-09-02 08:39:03 · update #2
If only more thought like you. Basically let the laws keep us safe and its up to us to find out own happiness. Now you will always have someone trying to push their beliefs on you - that's just the way it is - freedom of speech you know - but to try to legislate beliefs - well, that's just not the government's job. Let your own faith, church and family do that.
As far as sexism and abortion for example., well, that is a moral and legal quagmire and not as easy. Each party has to take responsibility. But IMO, if a married man sires a child with another woman and then complains that he has to help support that child, and it ruined his marriage, then he has a lot more problems than reverse sexism.
2006-09-02 08:54:37 · answer #1 · answered by Sage Bluestorm 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Dude, I totally hear what your saying. My grandparents are the pastors of their own churches, but unlike them i don't dictate the bible to its full meaning. My point is that there are some laws to protect peoples rights. If they want to do something let them. But by the way Gay marriage is weird and I'm not saying it because I'm from Texas; but because i go to Ozen high in Beaumont and there are a lot of gay girls in that school. It's creepy. Also what if a girl was raped and didn't go to the hospital ? Should she still bear that type of burden?
2006-09-03 20:24:40 · answer #2 · answered by karren b 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
How simple you make it sound.
The comment on abortion brings up another imposition on others. The same folks who demand the right to abortion and reproductive freedom for women, are the same exact people who do not ever grant reproductive freedom for men.
Do they care if a man's life or marriage is ruined, or he is forced to abandon his education, to support an unwanted child? No, no, a thousand times no. And, most here are no better. Only women are given that right.
So, those who demand the most loudly not to impose anyone's beliefs on themselves are the same who demand to have their own views imposed on another class of people.
As long as the women of this nation snarl, "YOU PLAY; YOU PAY!" at men, then it is extremely moral for others to try to impose that same exact rule on women and to take away their reproductive freedom.
If women allowed men to walk away from an unwanted pregnancy as they demand to be allowed to do themselves, then I would say there is no basis for taking away their abortion or reproductive rights. Clearly, that is not the case, and those who are trying to restrict abortion rights are merely trying to force women to follow the same rules women demand for men.
Let me guess. Can't handle that totally non-sexist view, can you?
2006-09-02 15:33:04 · answer #3 · answered by retiredslashescaped1 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Basic laws do serve basic purpose, yes, and are a good thing.
HOWEVER, never underestimate the power of any committee to come up with the most convoluted ridiculous laws every dreamed up based on who is paying their salary..
2006-09-02 15:58:05 · answer #4 · answered by turtle girl 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hi-is that one question or many? LOL!
All I can say is.........
Love an' Peace xxx
:D:D:D
2006-09-02 15:33:17 · answer #5 · answered by WW 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋