Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: ghostmonkey
These definitions conflate the role of the person with the role of the government, and morality with legality. Let me throw a few thoughts out, give you an idea about my perspective of things.

For example, on drugs and prostitution: I think both should be legal, but I should be free to construct a contract between myself and my employees, or between myself and those I provide insurance for, or between myself and my tenants, etc that will allow me to fire/delist/evict them on the spot for participating in these activities.

And if you have a factory and you don't want to hire gays, or don't want to give them same-sex partner benefits, or whatever, and you write a contract outlining such, I say great, go ahead, that is your right as an employer to set the terms of employment and they can accept or refuse.

And if Bob Smith, owner of Fudge-Packers International, wants to give dental insurance to Henry's husband Dan, fine. As a consumer of their fudge, I may object and no longer buy from them. As Bob's priest, I may disfellowship him. As Bob's doctor/lawyer/insurer/baker, I may refuse him service. As Bob's landlord, I may evict him (pursuant to terms of contract). Notice something: there is still morality, but not at the hands of a central nanny-state.

By replacing morality with legality, you remove the ability to differentiate people who make moral choices because they want to (or are moral themselves), from people who make moral choices out of fear of the state.

79 posted on 05/03/2006 3:39:26 PM PDT by M203M4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]


To: M203M4

"By replacing morality with legality, you remove the ability to differentiate people who make moral choices because they want to (or are moral themselves), from people who make moral choices out of fear of the state."

Well said. I often ask a question of those righteous righties. The question is what value does government forced morality carry? If we use the power of government to force moral behaviour, then we no longer have the free will to chose to be moral. Without that free will, we are no longer chosing to follow God's path. If we don't freely chose to follow God's path, are we capable of receiving his gift of everlasting life in heaven?

The bottom line is that the righteous right feel that it is valid for them to coerce the government into forcing people into certain behaviours, therefore they are taking away the gift of a free will from those people. They are trumping God, for our own good.....


228 posted on 05/10/2006 8:49:44 AM PDT by CSM (I went to the gas station this weekend and it was so popular that I had to wait for a pump. D-Chivas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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