[El Conservador]

Over the past few decades, we have implemented a "live and let live" culture whereby abhorrence for immorality is seen as illegitimate if promoted through governmental means. Instead, we are supposed to let our culture be poisoned slowly -- and if we protest, we are told that as long as we turn off our own TV's, all will be well.

So he wants government regulating morality???

He lost me here.

[UltraConservative]

Government has regulated morality in this country for the better part of 230 years. Only the Supreme Court has barred legislative bodies from regulating morality. And we still regulate morality: see drug laws, murder laws, etc. It's only the morals social liberals don't like (e.g. regulation against sodomy) that have been barred from the public square.

[E Rocc]

So he wants government regulating morality???

Typically the cultural collectivists will cop out and say "society" should regulate the culture. They forget to mention that society armed with the power of compulsion has a name: "government".

Given the choice between Paris Hilton and Donald Wildmon, I'll take Paris any day. She compels no one.

-Eric

[LexBaird]

So he wants government regulating morality???

He lost me here.

You mean you want no regulation of societal mores like laws against theft, rape, violence, slavery, public drunkeness, age of consent, etc.?

Or do you want the government only regulating the morals you like, and ignoring the ones you want to be free to violate?

[Sloth]

So he wants government regulating morality???

There is not a law in existence that doesn't do exactly that.