2007-06-13 18:35:39 · 7 answers · asked by 6th Finger 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
You have to define morals, particularly the source for the definition. If they are religious concepts it is unconstitutional. If they are related to health it comes under the definition of health and welfare and traditionally can be done, however whether it should be done is another matter. If it violates individual privacy it is unconstitutional.. You really have to handle it on a case by case basis. There is a ton a law for example pornography is still not universally and clearly defined. ,
2007-06-13 18:47:41 · answer #1 · answered by sSuper critic 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well the only branch that can create laws is Congress. As far as setting a moral example and passing laws pertaining to those morals, I am not sure what in particular you mean. Congress passes laws establishing appropriate conduct for all types of situations on a regular basis.
2007-06-13 18:46:16 · answer #2 · answered by Tmess2 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, The problem is whose morals are we gonna use? What may sound moral to you sounds stupid to me and vice versa. Whenever the subject of morality comes up I always picture that scene in The Godfather when Michael Corleone is having his nephew baptized. Meanwhile he's having the boys commit murder and wanton mayhem on anyone who would dare threaten his power.
Here's another one. In the 1950s during the height of the red scare as "Tailgunner" Joe McCarthy and his butt puppet J. Edgar Hoover were peeking under every bed and behind every garbage can for communists and generally using The Constitution as toilet paper J. Edgar Hoover was a huge crossdresser. That's right ol' J. Edgar loved silky things.
Obviously we have some mixed messages here don't we? So if these big wigs can't keep their ducks in a row why should we stand for them trying to keep us in line?
2007-06-13 20:46:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No I think the people should set the moral example and then their represetative government should make laws pertaining to those morals.
2007-06-13 18:49:40 · answer #4 · answered by sociald 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, not in the U.S. they shouldn't, freedom of religion means you can subscribe to any group of morals YOU choose, the governmant CANNOT.
2007-06-13 18:43:36 · answer #5 · answered by Sainteh 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Just wonderful! just what we need thought police! I am really sorry you just gave thim this idea!
2007-06-13 18:52:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Every F*(%*)(% )G one of them!
2007-06-13 18:40:33 · answer #7 · answered by TedEx 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋