Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: nathanbedford
"The article is not about "the entire criminal code" but about "prostitutes and porn"."

And your post expanded that to "laws about morality". Those were the dots I was commenting on and I still can't connect them.

45 posted on 11/25/2011 6:21:02 AM PST by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]


To: circlecity
It seems to me that if you are about the business of taking away individual liberty, of frustrating someone's pursuit of his definition of "happiness" by bringing to bear the full force and power of the criminal law, the burden is on you to connect the dots.

In connecting those dots, you have five or six thousand years of history to overcome and in every year your way has failed.

You are asking us to endorse a failed system. You are asking us to endorse a hypocritical system. You are asking us to endorse an expensive and self-defeating system.

You are asking us to deprive people of their liberty for engaging in sex in commerce when if they did it for free it would be perfectly legal. Society has passed your position by.

This is your law, you defend it. You explain the broken lives and the crowded jails. You explain the venereal disease. You explain the white slavery. You explain the brutal pimps. You explain the traffic in underage girls.

You must explain all of these things because your system has brought them about. Kindly spare me your inability to connect the dots, you are consigning people to misery and worse.

The German system is clearly better because it produces less misery and more freedom. I thought that was what the pursuit of happiness was all about. It is certainly not about our personal biblical views which we impose on others through the vehicle of the criminal law. If you want to impose the criminal law on someone you have the burden of justifying it. And doing so you shall not be heard to say that we would sweep away all laws against all crimes.

We are talking about laws which are not malum in se but laws which impose criminal sanctions not because victims need to be protected but because hypocrites need to be vindicated.


49 posted on 11/25/2011 7:09:42 AM PST by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson