Posted on 12/16/2006 11:22:33 AM PST by Blackirish
LOL!
As far as building codes go, I'm as libertarian as the day is long. I'd rather live in the woods in a funky cabin than in anywhere near a homeowners' association...
Poor? I was dirt poor and raised two children as a single parent, the other half ditched early on. Lack of money has nothing to do with morality or children being raised well. I don't know why some of you focus on money so much, as though more money makes people good or happy.
All laws are legislating morality. You and your ilk just don't want any laws that restrict any kind of sexual behavior; or rather, you seem to want laws that promote sexual immorality. I bet you don't even admit there is such a thing as sexual immorality. It's as though sex is sancrosanct. It's just like fire - fire can keep you warm, cook your food, or burn down a city. Needs limits; just like sex.
BTW, you guys keep getting the meaning of "theocracy" wrong, I don't know how many times I've posted the dictionary meaning. Not going to look it up again. But basically it means rule BY priests, imams, religious hierarchy. It does not mean having laws based on basic religious principles, which is what all laws are based on.
(Which you would know, if you've ever read about the history of English law. Ever heard of Blackwell?)
You'll have to explain that one to me. I see them as a way to keep at least a degree of competition in the price fixing that tends to go on here.
We like the military beaches for tourist-free enjoyment. It's still fun to tweak the time-share salesmen in Waikiki from time to time when they approach us thinking we're tourists. I love the look on their faces when they ask us where we're from and I say something off the wall like Kalihi or Waianae.
Homosexuality is a mental illness. Why should anyone with a mental illness be allowed to foster or adopt children?
And if someone is a closeted homosexual, no one will know or care. But when adopting children, it is important to make sure that the prospective parents are: A man and a woman who are married to each other, not criminals, drug addicts, etc.
So you think the above opinion means I want a theocracy? Are you out of your mind? You seem to think that "conservative" means "let it all hang out"!
And why are you so angry?
Kind of conflicting isn't that? You want to live in a cabin in the woods, AND want the government to stick it's nose into your funky cabin checking up on your sex life.
You want the government to keep tabs on the sexuality of its citizens and deprive them of rights based upon that.
You say that you want laws that restrict certain kinds of sexual behavior you disagree with. So, that would entail busting down doors and catching people at home, in the act.
You want theocracy.
Just mind your own business, because its none of your business.
I am not angry, I'm too busy laughing at you. Guys like you are why the Republicans lost.
I almost had a job on Kwajalein earlier this year. Talk about secluded beach fronts, no one is allowed on the island unless they have a clean background check...
Well, my wife's as well.
Okay, and Luther...she's got such lovely eyes for a Great Dane...and a way of walking that just....!
Oh yes, and Rositta, our illegal Mexican maid. I guess crawling over/under those fences makes them so flexible!
Just to be sure, deadbolt your bedroom door, Little Jeremiah might send his goons out to ensure that you aren't doing anything he thinks is perverted.
The photos I just looked up are gorgeous... a little too secluded for my taste. The photos I just saw on the top thing that came up on Google are awesome, though. And I thought Hawaiian waters were clear.
They better be wearing their Kevlar Chastity Belts.
You libertine-arians live on hyperbole! I do not advocate, nor have I ever advocated, police knocking on doors! But I do advocate disallowing homosexuals to foster or adopt children. How do you equate these two different things?
In case it didn't occur to you, when a couple want to adopt, TPTB go over these people with a fine tooth comb. They want to make sure the child is going to a safe home with good parents.
I also advocate that "Gay-Straight" etc clubs should be kicked out of schools. How does this equate with police knocking on doors? I don't want kids being indoctrinated that "gay is good".
You folk don't know how to reason.
LOL!
You guys are funny.
Not only do I not care what you or other people "do" in their bedrooms, I don't WANT to know!
All I request is KEEP IT IN THE BEDROOM, NOT ON THE PUBLIC STREETS, NOT IN THE PUBLIC RESTROOMS, NOT IN PUBLIC PARKS, NOT ON BEACHES I USED TO GO TO BUT CAN'T GO TO ANYMORE, and especially NOT IN SCHOOLS!
Is that crystal clear now?
We do not legislate morality.
We legislate Human, Civil, and Property Rights.
Think about it.
It is you whose reason is a little off. So closeted gays are better parents than those who have let it slip that they aren't straight? Funny, the closeted gays I knew (at least those who came out eventually) were a lot stranger than their counterparts who had come to grips with their biology/genetic makeup. They did a lot more harm to their family in the long run by staying closeted.
"You want the government to keep tabs on the sexuality of its citizens and deprive them of rights based upon that."
Ookay, how about this? Should a person with a penchant for bestiality be allowed to be a high school principal?
Should a person who lives in an incestuous relationship with a close blood relative be allowed to be a childrens' counsellor?
Should a prostitute be allowed to run a day care center?
Should a judge be allowed to moonlight as a prostitute?
Why should people have "rights" based on their sexual behavior? Is there any sexual behavior that would, in your mind, prohibit anyone from any position, career, or profession?
I remember a while ago on FR there was an article (and quite a contentious thread) about a psychiatrist or psychologist, can't remember which, who worked with abused children. In his spare time, he either acted or posed for still pictures on a "gay" sado-masochism website. There were actually people saying he had a right to do this and still counsel abused children! I suppose you think he has a "right" to counsel abused children and still be a homosexual sado-masochism pracitioner.
It is immoral to steal, assault others, kidnap them, murder them, etc, is it not?
Not saying that "closeted" homosexuals are better parents at all. When parents are vetted for adoption or foster parents, they are gone over with fine tooth combs. Homosexuals should be weeded out.
As far as other private citizens, if they keep their sex lives private, no one will know or care. And that's the way I prefer it.
The only reason homosexuality is a huge issue is because homosexuals have shoved their agenda in our faces for more than 25 years.
I'll post a link or two that will illustrate exactly what I mean in a minute.
Think about it. Is murder immoral? Yes. Is that why it's illegal? No. It's illegal because you are generally thought to be violating someone's rights when you kill them.
You don't get thrown in jail for boosting the distributor out of my vehicle because it's some kind of moral failing. You get thrown in jail for boosting the distributor out of my vehicle because you are violating my property rights.
You don't get the law called on you when you burn a church, bail on your child support, or grab your co-worker's t**s because those aren't nice things to do. You get the law called on you because those are ways of violating other people's rights.
That said, I think morality is a good thing, and I think most, if not all laws aim to have a moral component in them.
But our nation wasn't founded because Our Founding Patriarchs held certain morals to be self-evident or inalienable. No, those guys were all about rights. And so we live in a country founded upon the idea of keeping our rights safe from the government, from our fellow citizens, and--most relevantly today--from organized self rightous religious....people.
So, although they did mention "God" occasionally, and "The Creator" and whatnot, they quite deliberately avoided writing Baby Jeebus or Leviticus or The Ten Commandments into our original documents, and they based the government which we enjoy to this day on the Enlightenment concept of Rights.
IOW, it's immoral to violate someone's rights.
Thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.