But his example of passing a law preventing people from having kids before marriage misses the obvious.
Why not repeal laws that promote and encourage these welfare babies?
Make no mistake: You CAN legislate morality. The question is - whose morality?
For the last 40 years we've had a code of legal morals and ethics that are dead set on the destruction of the family and of America. And as a natual result - our economy is down the tubes.
"...who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavoring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world, and through all time;...that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order; and finally, that truth is great and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them. ""I HAVE SWORN UPON THE ALTAR OF GOD ETERNAL HOSTILITY TO EVERY FORM OF TYRANNY OVER THE MIND OF MAN"--The Virginia Act For Establishing Religious Freedom
--Thomas Jefferson, 1786
You certainly can, that doesn't mean that you should. Enforcing laws involving sexual morality, like much of drug law enforcement, typically involves overstepping Constitutional bounds.
A much better way to create a moral society is to force people to deal with the consequences of their actions. If the government didn't subsidize children with welfare checks, more people would avoid teenage/out of wedlock pregnancies. If the government didn't subsidize health care, people would probably take better care of their personal health (meaning that they would avoid gluttony, drunkenness, drug use, and sex with strangers). If there wasn't a vast social "safety net," people would become more thrifty.
The reason for morality is that actions [should] have consequences. A cradle to grave nanny state creates the illusion that actions do not have consequences, or makes those consequences seem minor. Take away the safety nets, and morality will become largely self-enforcing.
You certainly can, that doesn't mean that you should. Enforcing laws involving sexual morality, like much of drug law enforcement, typically involves overstepping Constitutional bounds.
A much better way to create a moral society is to force people to deal with the consequences of their actions. If the government didn't subsidize children with welfare checks, more people would avoid teenage/out of wedlock pregnancies. If the government didn't subsidize health care, people would probably take better care of their personal health (meaning that they would avoid gluttony, drunkenness, drug use, and sex with strangers). If there wasn't a vast social "safety net," people would become more thrifty.
The reason for morality is that actions [should] have consequences. A cradle to grave nanny state creates the illusion that actions do not have consequences, or makes those consequences seem minor. Take away the safety nets, and morality will become largely self-enforcing.
There isn’t going to be a “spiritual cleansing” until the great civil war eliminates all the stupid people first. They will NEVER discover the true cause of their problems and will always side with the most vocal liar.
bookmark
USA Senator Rand Paul is CORRECT, the USA NEEDS to have a “spiritual cleansing” or to put it in my own, a spiritual spring cleaning.
God Bless Sen. Rand Paul.