Posted on 11/11/2004 9:34:13 AM PST by Tailgunner Joe
"For example, God does not command us to have children..."
Wrong!
Genesis 1:28
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it:...
Man, considered as a creature, must necessarily be subject to the laws of his Creator, for he is entirely a dependent being. And consequently, as man depends absolutely upon his Maker for everything, it is necessary that he should, in all points, conform to his Maker's will.This will of his Maker is called the law of nature.
This law of nature, being coeval with mankind, and dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force and all their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original. The doctrines thus delivered we call the revealed or divine law, and they are to be found only in the holy scriptures. These precepts, when revealed, are found upon comparison to be really a part of the original law of nature, as they tend in all their consequences to man's felicity.
Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation, depend all human laws; that is to say, no human laws should be suffered to contradict these. - Blackstone - Of the Nature of Laws in General.
Even by your own tennets, it is your God that gave you free will. For another mere human to take that free will away from you is a violation of Gods will.
Christian culture? Like the Christian Kings of England and their treatment of the peasant class? Or the Emporers of Rome after conversion to Christianity and the abuses done in their names?
History, it seems, is against you on that one.
The very idea of "common law", which should be called "english common law" (as it was adopted), predated christianity in england. It would be just as accurate to say "Paganism has always been recognised as part of America's common law". Our government and our legal system was based on reason.
You are hopeless. Have fun pushing your priesthood driven brand of socialism. Just have the balls to call it what it is.
youve gotta see this
Brehon law had the same basic principles in it as the Founders espoused. Are you sure it wasn't based off of that? Makes more sense really. Instead of having an Inquisition deciding what the law was and how it applied, or a sovreign King deciding law, the old Celts had a seperate and educated adjudication class. Sounds a lot more like our modern legal system than some priest saying "God told me to tell you this".
I believe in the rule of law, not your godless anarchy. Black anarchy is the wrecking ball for red communism. You and the Socialists are allies against traditional religion and civil society. The only difference is that you really believe in the commietopian "withering away of the state" whereas the reds know it's all a con job.
Nonsense.
I didn't ask you to make unfounded assertions. I asked you to prove it using logic and reason.
Hmmm... What's this?
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
Genesis 1:28
And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.
Genesis 9:1
Thy wife shall be as a fruitful vine by the sides of thine house: thy children like olive plants round about thy table.
Psalm 128:3
And, not coincidentally, in violation of the tenets of Christianity.....
Maybe you are right, from a moral point of view. Maybe God has a higher "ownership" right in my person than I do.
However, I have a higher "ownership" right in my person than does any other human being. So, no other human being has the right to tell me what to do with my person unless my actions impact the liberty of another person.
Just look around, and you'll see that it's not nonsense.
Are you saying that "Love your neighbor" should be a law? Do I really need to be forced by government to love my neighbor, or just not do anything that interferes with his rights, without his consent? Are you going to confiscate ten percent of my earnings and give it to the church? When are the mass baptisms at the point of a gun scheduled?
You may say that Christianity is the part of America's common law, and you may find quotes of founding fathers to support that. Why, then, were some Christian rules made laws, while others weren't? Could it be that some rules, some morality, should not be forced, but are a personal decision?
While the literal definition of a theocracy may be a government beholden to the priests, if the rules of Christianity are the law, administered by whatever legal means, is their really a difference?
I like the Libertarians' view on some things. Too bad they lean waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too far left for me.
What is it with you libertarians? You all think we should be ruled by "philosopher kings" who just "reason" up the law as they go along. Why do you want us to be ruled by elites?
Libertarians are like Marxists in that they think that only their philosophical school has the capacity to reason and they have all the answers. If only the people would see the wisdom of voting Libertarian, then America would be a utopia with no need of government at all. The only difference between this childish fantasy and Marxism are that they're different roads to achieve the same impossible goal.
A sinner or immoral person does not impact my liberty unless they engage in sins or immoral actions that impact my rights. Want to engage in orgies? Fine, do it on your own property and out of sight of non-participants. Want to worship a golden calf? Fine, but don't expect me to pay for it.
What the state should do is much more limited than what religious morality requires you to do. The only proper role of the state is to punish or ban behavior that harms the person or property of a nonconsenting party.
Only radical libertarians and anarchists call for an end to the state. The vast majority of people with libertarian leanings only want to severely limit what the state is allowed to do.
You, on the other hand, love Big Government as much as Hillary Clinton. You just want to use Big Government for your own ends.
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.