Prohibiting Pornography -- A Moral Imperative

Morality in Media ^ | 1984 | Paul J. McGeady

[tacticalogic]

Are you aware that most conservatives take a "strict constructionist" view of the Constitution which suggests that the "original intent" should not have to be discerned in order to apply the plain language of the law?

No. My understanding of "strict constructionism" is that the original intent must be considered if we are to hold true to the principles laid out in that document.

1. The meaning of the Phrase "to regulate trade" must be sought in the general use of it, in other words in the objects to which the power was generally understood to be applicable, when the Phrase was inserted in the Constn.

2. The power has been understood and used by all commercial & manufacturing Nations as embracing the object of encouraging manufactures. It is believed that not a single exception can be named.

James Madison to Joseph C. Cabell

18 Sept. 1828

[Robert_Paulson2]

morality in the old testament was multiple wives.
morality in the new is not.

Jesus came of many men whose wives (plural) were not their first or last.

so the 'bible' as basis for our laws, will not work... unless folks pick and choose what laws will or will not be codified.
THAT is illegal.
Always has been.
Atheists can be moral. Jews can be moral. NONE of the founders that I know of, were practicing Jews. Should their laws be the foundation for ours, or should we make it the protestant majorities?

you religion in government folks ignore history's lessons in Europe. they will NEVER be joined. And any attempt to do so, is nothing more than a christian version of 'sharia'. Religion and state joined together, will NEVER be allowed in this Republic, and is at this point illegal at any level.

It may be inevitable in France and parts of Europe, but...

Won't happen. Never.
call that moral relativism if you want.
tis the fact.
the only theocratic merging of faith and state that will ever fly, is the one that arise when Jesus himself does it.

alleged lunes that purport to do so, in his name, apart from HIS appearing, are just that... lunes, doomed to failure on the European historical scale.

moral relativity my butt.
it's history. it does NOT work.
learn it.
or repeat it.

the majority here in the usa will NOT repeat it.
chalcedonian theocratics and wall builders notwithstanding.

[tpaine]

It appears you will get no answer for a day or so TC.

It's been a good thread everyone, thanks.

[tpaine]

It appears you will get no answer for a day or so TL. [correction]

It's been a good thread everyone, thanks.

[Robert_Paulson2]

yup,
best to leave the thread before he threatens to 'use force' on folks again.

night tpaine. all.

[Mockingbird For Short]

Wow. You're lucky. I don't know of anyone else who doesn't get spam!

[tpaine]

Look in a mirror for arrogance.

[Robert_Paulson2]

Which is precisely why we threw your lot of monarchists/theocrats out.

We expurged your failed monacratic tyranny and made a better form of self governance, not religion based, that allows for NO state religion or divine right of rule over subjects based in that religion. We are the better people for it.
And you will find, cousin, that the more you imitate us, the better your country will get.

Britain was one of the worst offenders.
MY family was beheaded by the folks of a different faith in YOUR country...

You won't ever get americans to buy into a state religion or a monarchy, though we do respect your right to so choose for yourselves, to be subjects.

in this country, we are the sovereigns by recognition of a Constitution, not declaraton of a monarch. In your country, YOU are still considered subjects with rights asceeded to you by the monarchy. More or less still subjects (wiht rights granted by government) after merely 12 centuries of subjugation.

we may be (and often are) related by blood, cousins by birth but we are totally unrelated in our form and flow of governance.

We have no God of the State, or religion thereof either.
Glad you like it. To many of us rebels, it is anathema... and good reason why we never countenance your form of governance here. Though as you have seen, some would gladly embrace a monarchy here, along with divine right, the rule of a national church and so on.

We will never as a whole do so here.
goodnite brit.

[Robert_Paulson2]

your empire
never came close to the POWER we project today.

the military might of ONE of our states, like california, dwarfs the rest of the planet's combined. . . oh mighty empirist.

we are not an empire however.
we are a republic.

we have saved your bacon many times.
and will do it again, if need be.
and we deeply appreciate your comraderie, where we can be together as relatives indeed with similar names, faces, and causes.

but we will never embrace empire.
will always be rebels.
and will always throw off the yokes of repression.
religious, political or otherwise.

for as americans, we are rebels at heart,
rebels with a cause... and that is both a freedom of individuals FROM religion, just as much as it is a freedom of religion FOR individuals.

the state has NO say, nor shall it ever.

never will we be convinced othewise.
this side of God's eternal destiny.

the religion as state crowd will never succeed in doing to us, what they did for over a millenia in failed Europe.
never.

romantic, the thought of empire.
but not for us Americans.
you enjoy it,
we would rather you keep it to yourself, we already had our fill.

[Mockingbird For Short]

Knock off the personal attacks

Thanks for not removing the thread just yet!!! It's been interesting. I agree with Joe on the basic premise (the main article), but I can see the sense in a few (although very few) of the arguments against it. How DOES one define "decency" or "obscenity" in a world that denies moral absolutes? Although I believe in and love the Bible, I don't think the laws of Christianity as found in the bible should be adopted as the laws of the nation. (That is for a future time.) But if you don't adopt the Bible's concepts of morality, how do you settle on definitions of "decency" and "obscenity"? Morality can be and must be legislated (morality, meaning behavior), but what is the Standard of what is moral?

(Hope this makes sense.)

[FreeReign]

That said, obscenity is "freedom of speech", but not on public property.

Which brings us to the legal question: Is the Internet public or private?

Any part of the internet on public property is -- public property.

Next question?

[Mockingbird For Short]

but we will never embrace empire. will always be rebels. and will always throw off the yokes of repression. religious, political or otherwise.

(Including those awful yokes of grammar, punctuation, and so on...)

: )

[Robert_Paulson2]

(Hope this makes sense.)

---

it does, more than you know.
this is indeed the holy grail of personal liberty to be an american.
YOU have the privilege of making moral judgements on your own. and the responsibility. Gone is the era of a supposed 'God ordained' monarchy or lordship, ruling as to what is an dwhat is NOT moral. YOU have the responsibility to do so on your own.

some folks, here, think it is a failure because people can 'sin' and ostensibily 'get away with it' unless government becomes the moral God of our lives.

I think it is a success because WE can choose NOT to do what is wrong and instead what is right WITHOUT being held at gunpoint.

I will never willingly trade the latter for the former.
And to some, that makes you a pervert. To most americans though, it just means, we are free to make our own choices.


and screaming that "this causes that" is not enough to make it a law that "this" is or should be illegal. It's just the experiment of freedom following it's God ordained course, where men can choose to sin, or not... without coercion from others. Trying to figure out where lines MUST be drawn to protect lives and property is the dilemma and conundrum of republican government. And wrestling about it will never, must never, reach the point of satsifaction.

the folks who want to regulate sin, will never do so successfully. and those who want to turn us all into perverts by fiat of law, won't succceed either.

we will all...
just have to choose.
"choose ye this day whome YOU will serve"

it's up to people what they want or refuse to do.
not government.

[Robert_Paulson2]

the faster I type, the more mistakes I make.
sorry.

[Mockingbird For Short]

and will always throw off the yokes of repression. religious, political or otherwise.

So, are you saying that "anything goes"?

What about the "repression" of evil? Is that a yoke that you want to throw off?

[Mockingbird For Short]

Nah, I just saw a chance for levity and swooped in. Your typing is fine.

[killjoy]

If you banned porn, computer equipment manufacturers would all go bankrupt.

[Mockingbird For Short]

Gone is the era of a supposed 'God ordained' monarchy or lordship, ruling as to what is an dwhat is NOT moral. YOU have the responsibility to do so on your own.

If the responsibility for deciding what is right and wrong are mine, why do we have laws that tell us that certain behaviors are not acceptable?