Posted on 09/30/2004 1:56:48 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
Correct, American soldiers fight for freedom or the preservation of it. (at least they should) and those things, drinking, whoring around, gambling, etc... are freedoms we have. All are legal under the laws of the USA.
I'm not conflating, I'm pointing out that the courts calling the bible "hate literature" is not a very distant slide down the slippery slope of letting the government enact content-based restrictions on what acts of consenting adults may be read about and viewed by consenting adults.
The post to which I was replying was scoffing at the idea that government restrictions on pornography could lead to government restrictions on the Bible. After all, Noah's daughters did try to get him drunk have sex with him, remember.
That's a good question. Do I?
I don't (seem to) need God to make me dislike murder, or even make me want to do hurtful things to murderers. But that's not quite there, is it?
What would you suggest?
I simply don't agree with those measures. I totally believe in the first amendment, IE. your right to worship as you see fit without fear of persecution from the gov. or another party within the union (or outside) Again, I do not agree with the USA gov in any way furthering the cause, or acting in the interest of organized religion, beyond protecting it's right to exist.
The drawings didn't start until the original elmer gantrys' made it evil.
Beware.. Common sense becomes addicting, once you start to use it as a matter of course.
"Not when you advocate putting your god into institutions my tax dollars pay for..."
No, sir. You have it wrong. You advocate taking my God out of the institutions that were cornerstoned by the Ten Commandments...the same Ten Commandments that are displayed in the chambers of the US Supreme Court in recognition of that fact.
When you remove the Judeo-Christian tenets of our Republic from the Republic it cease to be what it was created to be: a nation whose people do not need to be controlled by their rulers because they find themselves individually accountable to their Maker.
Read Alexis de Tocqueville if you haven't already. He was a secular Frenchman who understood the unique relationship of God in American institutions. He saw that our government was only effective in that it was for a faithful people. Take away God and America ceases to be what it is and it will become something else.
Frankly, since the atheist/Communist onslaught in the post-war period America has, indeed, changed. And not for the better.
So why should I care about my survival? Besides, the topic at hand, pornography, isn't about destroying society, merely hurting it. As long as I get my jollies in relative safety and comfort, why care about the other fellow?
Atheists practice what is known as enlightened self-interest, which means they work for the good of society, not because some big guy in the sky is forcing them to, but because they know that without society, they'd be up an unsanitary tributary without a means of propulsion.
Good for you.
Now tell me why it is obligatory for ME to practice enlightened self-interest.
It strikes me as odd that there are so many people who would do evil if God wasn't keeping them on the straight and narrow. Those folks give me the willies.
The strait and narrow path has nothing to do with works, in the first place.
In the second place, I'm saying I would or wouldn't do anything. I'm asking why, if the impulse strikes me, I ought not to.
Give me someone who does good out of his own self-interest any day of the week -- I can trust that kind of honesty.
And suppose his self-interest was to do evil.
So you think you know the First Amendment better than its drafters?
If you're primarily worried about the DMB you don't get out much.
"a nation whose people do not need to be controlled by their rulers because they find themselves individually accountable to their Maker. "
You're exactly right! Don't get me wrong, I do not loathe religion and undestand the positive impact it has on the lives of many. What I DO loathe is the corrupting and oppressive qualities it exhibits when the power that comes with it falls into the wrong hands... Catholic Europe, the theocracies throughout the ME, etc. Religion, since its inception has often been used as a control mechanism, and being that the history of that is well established, as freedom loving people, we should prevent any such 'institution' with such a history to rear its head within the ranks of our ruling powers.
I do not agree with the display of the Ten Commandments in any government facility. It is a step in a dangerous direction, history proves it so.
bunpkin
And, finally, it seems that whereas they might call you "bigot" or "theocrat," you deem them "libertines." Of course, I can't see anyone of your unique intellect actually understanding the aforementioned point.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. "
Please show me where in this amendment it is stated the government shall support any one religion by displaying its texts in a public venue?
What does this line mean to you? "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
Um, no Tailgunner, you are missing an extremely important element of the argument:
Pornography is an ENTIRELY subjective, opinion-based classification. What constitutes Porn to one person is simply a normal sexual act/experience to another. Your definition of what is "acceptable" sexual behavior is limited by your own religious/social beliefs, and your standards may be different than mine. I can respect your views and not agree or accept them. This gives you no right to send agents of the law into MY homes, or to MY community's local stores to enforce YOUR personal sexual beliefs.
I may be a Republican because I support strong national defense, tax cuts and lower tax rates, the 2nd Amendment (absolute) right to bear arms, and the protection of human life from the womb forward, but "moral standard legislation" when it comes to so-called pornography is one of the few (very few) issues in which your common liberal exhibits more sense than (your type of) conservative.
Let's get this straight. The U.S. Constitution is not a document which justifies intrusion into the private lives and bedrooms of adult U.S. citizens by their government. Rather, the Bill of Rights is meant to limit such repressive tactics from authority figures, even those of the so-called conservative Fallwell/FCC persuasions.
Why do so many people who claim to want the federal government's nose out of their business and their family's life continue to impose their moral standards on the rest of us through just those means? Why do people like you, otherwise great lovers of freedom and skeptics of federal oppression continue to give the government a pass into our homes and our lives because you disapprove of our behavior?
Government intrusion is just that, Tailgunner, whether it's for our guns, our beliefs, or our personal effects and property (which includes porn and drugs as well as it does property, jewelry, electronics, money, etc). If that's how you interpret the Constitution than you can keep it. You're no different from those left-wing "living document" tyrants who impose their will America's citizens on abortion, gays, etc.
Very well said, good post.
Hey, from what I've seen, there is NO DOUBT about their priorities.
Besides killing animals for food and keeping away from frostbite (including frostbite on their 'junk'), what else was there to do?
It reminded me of the pictograms we place on our NASA probes throughout the solar system, you know, in case E.T. finds it... so they could understand what we were all about. Well, Mr. Cave Paint wanted future generations to know what they were all about. There were some smaller paintings of deer and that sort of thing, but 'the goods' were obviously very important.
Well put, Rock.
--- Joe will be unable to make any coherent reply.
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.