Posted on 07/06/2006 11:35:38 AM PDT by GeorgiaDawg
Hi all....
FReepers have been very helpful in the past and I wanted to touch base to see if you could help again.
Our city council is debating putting Sunday alcohol sales on the ballot, yet again. The matter has been defeated twice in the past few years, but they are considering the referendum again.
While I am a believer of seperation of church and state, I also believe in keeping the Sabbath holy....can this be reconciled? I'd appreciate any thoughts or comments on any experience any of you have had with this issue...
Georgia Dawg
So you consider buying alchohol [sic] on a Sunday to be a civil right, a kin to not being subjected to torture?
Ostracism too.
How about some perspective. We are not talking about the majority violating the civil rights of the individual.
Worse, you advocate violating individual rights. The right of a person to earn an honest living. Honest because the person isn't initiating harm/force against anyone by selling a product. Communitarians sacrifice the individual in whole or part for the greater good of the group. It's social engineering. It's impossible for a group to exist without the individual first existing. To sacrifice the individual -- in whole, or in part -- diminishes the group.
Should you be able to move to any community in the country and force them to change how they have chosen to live simply to accomodate [sic] your preferences?
No, as I've said, it's immoral and criminal to initiate force against any person. I'd rather not to live where persons harm other persons or enlist government agents to act on your behalf to initiate harm/force against persons that have not harmed anyone.
Now that's a vice! :-)
You can support those traditions all you want. But the point me and various others here are trying to make to you is that is is immoral to use the gun-weilding coercive force of government to compel others to support those traditions as well.
If that was the case, why was it necessary to draft and enact criminal penalties against anyone who did not comply with those beliefs and values?
The topic of debate is using the law to enforce cultural and religious traditions. If you are keeping legal artifacts for the sake of the laws, themselves, why? There is no need for archaic laws.
If, OTOH, you are for maintaining Blue Laws because they cater to your own religious preferences, that is simply using the power of the State to impose your religious beliefs on others. If for the nebulous "cultural legal tradition", then why not Jim Crow? It was a long standing legal tradition to enforce cultural prejudices as well.
Any way you slice it, blue laws are simply legally enshrined bigotry.
I haven't scanned the thread but Nanny state laws are paternizing.
I can't beleive that people would actually allow their laws to treat them like little children that can't decide whether they want to have a brew whenever they doggone well want to.
California's laws (no sales from 2 am to 6 am) are to stop drunken driving.
And don't get me started on how State liquor stores show complete contempt for the citzenry and American capitalism.
In a just society, the law only prohibits that which violates the rights of others, and anything not prohibited is permitted.
The "need" of anti-alcohol zealots to impose their moral standards on everyone else under threat of State punishment has been accomodated in the continuance of the Blue Laws, hasn't it?
I'd say your statement is accurate, at least based on my limited knowledge and exposure to Blue Laws. I enjoy alcohol, too, I just never felt imposed upon by the limits. I guess I'm just not that thin-skinned.
Oh, right! Teddy gets away with stuff, everybody climb on...
Please tell me that's a joke on TX, and not a comment on your view of rights.
Wow, you're working from a very odd premise. Are you posting from the US, or some other country?
Because here in the US, our nation was founded on the principle that rights do not flow from government, or from the law - that they rather are inherent in the individual, and it is the role of government and the law to protect those rights.
This is laid out in the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
It was a radical departure from the organizing principles of governments of the day, mainly things like "The Divine Right of Kings" and what have you, but it is an idea that has swept the world...
... except in certain Blue Law jurisdictions.
... except in certain Blue Law jurisdictions.
FR's 'blue law' enclave seems to be growing. -- Are we loosing in the fight for constitutional restoration?
You really stretched that rubber band.
You are kidding right?
No the fight for constitutional restoration is a battle of attrition against (IMHO) a confused moral crusade group trying to enforce a code of morals via government power. If Christ were here today - would He recommend punishment for those who violate the ethics spelled out in the Bible?
I have read the Bible for decades and have never noticed a case where Christ said "punish that sinner".
I think a good citizen should be 1st true to their religious views and 2nd true to appreciating that our Federal Government was founded with separation of church and state language. It really is something to be very thankful for.
Oh - to all those trying to live a moral and spiritual life, keep up the good work. Your reward is in a place where " neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal."!
In the Bible the sabbath is saturday isn't it?
It is not the governments place to restrain people(adults) from doing something that is perfectly legal like consuming alcohol.
Wasn't Earl Warren a liberal control freak?
G'head, tell me...
Because the same entity that makes the blue law issues the free food stamps.
If you use money, you can buy anything.
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.