I see the moral issues, as they pertain to politics, as growing pains for a country with our form of government, largely populated with people who claim to be Christians.
For me, the Supreme Court started this decline with legislating morality, when the Constitution leaves this matter to the States.
Every group will not be made happy. Christians are wrong to believe our rights come from the Bible, although I still believe the Bible is where our forefathers got their ideas of freedom.
Homosexuals are equally wrong to believe they have Constitutional protection for marriage. This was not something the forefathers imagined or intended.
The S. Court started down this slippery slope with decisions most of us think were good.
Consensus is impossible to achieve, which is why our forefathers implemented the safeguards. This is not a democracy, and the majority does not rule. Sorry if that's what you were taught in school.
I think the current approach, sending homosexual marriage to the States is a right decision, based on the 10th Amendment to the C.
The easy short answer is that both camps are wrong. Christians cannot make laws just to please themselves, and individuals and other minorities cannot either.
2006-11-04 17:03:03
·
answer #1
·
answered by ? 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
1. I don't believe there has been any decline of music at all. If there was, it was during the 60's and 70's when most important genres that people enjoyed like Blues, Jazz, Swing, Classical, etc. began to be overshadowed by Rock getting big. I think those two decades are responsible for a lot stubbornness and ignorance towards and about music in present society. However, recently, I think music, (or if not music, at least Rock music) has been inclining again because of how much variety the genre now encompasses. Everything from Indie Rock to Black Metal is still Rock and still is considered popular music and I've noticed that because people start to listen to a variety of Rock genres, they'll eventually expand into many other genres too. 2. Classical Music refers more to a time period than a genre of music. According to Wikipedia, it began in the 9th century. I think current Classical music is music that emulates or draws inspiration only from music from before the 1930's. I also don't think it's possible to create music with the, as you call it, "'modern' pop/rock/etc.-esque instrumentation" such as electric guitars (including bass) and drums because those instruments weren't used in mainstream music before the 1900s. I'll expand more on this in 4. 3. Classical and mainstream are not exact opposites. Not even close. Mainstream music currently refers to any genre of Rock, Hip-Hop, or Pop. Even all those "underground" bands and rappers that all the cool internet kids force down peoples' throats are much more mainstream than that Funk band from the 70's I've never heard of. Probably thanks to the internet, musicians of these genres are able to advertise and make themselves known and popular. 4. Classical Music was mainstream 200 years ago. Classical is ALWAYS obsolete in society because it's what came before what exists now. 200 years from now, Classical music will probably include the mainstream music that exists now. 5. I think this has always been the case. You really don't need that many keys to make music. Lots of modern bands probably change chords more often than many classical composers that wrote entire pieces based around a single chord. It's just what music is. Thrash til' Death - Beethoven was mainstream in the early 19th century.
2016-05-22 00:24:46
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I can only assume you are referring to the "moral decline" of traditional values; the commercialization of sex and violence, open homosexuality, and the general disregard for traditional morals (lying, stealing, coveting...) It is a fact that these issues have become a large part of our culture. I blame our insatiable appetite for entertainment. This will never change, so we must. I hate to sound like a PC touting liberal, but we all need to learn to be tolerant of each others' lifestyles. This does not mean we have to accept them, but we have to find a way to live with them.
It wouldn't surprise me if this problem has happened in every generation before this one, and will continue to happen afterward. The world is ever growing, and therefore we must evolve accordingly.
2006-11-04 16:43:43
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Having an AWOL drug user in the Whitehouse might be a sign...
For example, the Bush administration has told a federal judge that terrorism suspects held in secret CIA prisons should not be allowed to reveal details of the "alternative interrogation methods" that their captors used to get them to talk.
Isn't this a lot like "Now the way I'm touching you will just be our little secret..."?
Attourneys have characterized the demands of the bush-league as being way beyond Kafka-esque, and now are more "Alice in Wonderland."
2006-11-04 16:33:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by Gaspode 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
We see the consequence right now - a loss of our freedoms and civil rights, including separation of church and state - because the people were too stupid to "elect" Bush, too stupid to realize that the Republicans were using "terror" as a scare tactic to keep themselves in power and really care nothing about stopping terrorism. Our supposedly good Democratic leaders were too afraid to contest either the 2000 or 2004 stolen elections, or to stand up for the principles of fairness, equality, and justice that they are supposed to believe in and support.
People are also too selfish and they only care about what is immediately going on - they care more about the price of gas than how their use of it supports terrorism and contributes to the destruction of our environment. Hopefully now people are realizing what is going on. Maybe they realize that the recent drop in gas prices was set up to get them to vote Republican, because prices will start going back up on November 8.
2006-11-04 16:39:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by Alan S 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
It increases immoral things like homosexuality or brings them out.
It does as you say increase stupidity, decrease education, cause, physical,mental and emotional health problems.
It allows also as you say individuals to come into the country which are detrimental to the country's health as a whole.
It allows people like Rev. Ted Haggard and his boy friend Mike Jones to make asses out of good hard working people while at the same time milking the political asses in washington.
2006-11-04 16:35:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Liberalism is a moral decline, and it will cause our country to fall if we do not stop it.
Liberalism must be stopped now!
2006-11-04 16:41:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
depends on what you consider morals
but people are becoming more corrupt and its getting out of hand. when rich people do things so they get more money it makes me sick.
Edit
I'll have sex with who i want, how i want, and as many times as i want, and i don't need the gov't in my face about it.
the whole parenting thing- parents need to stop being afraid of their kids. parents also need to stop depending on the gov't tell them how to raise their kids. why does it take a rating for parents to figure out that maybe the Sopranos isn't appropriate for their seven year old.
2006-11-04 16:30:01
·
answer #8
·
answered by Lexi 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I blame people like Paris Hilton I mean what kind of role model is that for a little girl
2006-11-04 16:36:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by josh h 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
Liberalism is the blame for this, and weak parents.
If you study what liberalism is you will find your answer.
No convictions, no beliefs, no traditions, do whatever you like,
regardless of what it is, sex,drugs. No judgments, no tolerance.
Trust me liberals only tolerate those that agree.
They are monetary richer than the Republicans....don't believe
me....
Do this one test.....find out who and not from Yahoo....who the richest Presidents were.....then go one step further....
Kerry was 100 times richer than President Bush...
But you will find most Presidents in history were Democrats,
almost 2 to 1.....almost......honestly
What a scam they have portrayed....'
2006-11-04 16:34:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by Rick D 3
·
1⤊
3⤋