Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: This Just In
Your previous posts did not include the word “LEGAL”. An individual does not have to argue the legal merits of an issue in order to legitimize it. There may be citizens who choose to recognize only the legality of an issue, but that does not devalue it’s validity. To recognize an issue solely on it’s legal merit is absurd. If pedophilia was legal, does this therefore mean it is lawful?

My meaning is very clear in what I wrote. I don't care what you or anyone else cares about in your private life--what motivates, say, your opposition to abortion--only what you care about in terms of government. Why would I have to stamp LEGAL on my comments, since this is a board about politics and government, not morality? One can have all the Bible-based values in the world, it doesn't matter WHERE one gets their values, only that they go about legitimizing laws in a LEGAL context--you can't go to the Supreme Court and say "Abortion should not be the law of the land because God says so."

138 posted on 05/06/2007 9:59:24 PM PDT by Darkwolf377 (Anti-socialist Bostonian, Anti-Illegal Immigration Bush supporter, Pro-Life Atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies ]


To: Darkwolf377

“...since this is a board about politics and government, not morality?”

It is impossible to separate politics and government from morality. For example, if this were true, Clinton would not have been impeached.

You may say that he was impeached because he lied under oath. Well, why did he have to lie in the first place? What activity did he engage in before being exposed(no pun intended)?


141 posted on 05/06/2007 10:21:58 PM PDT by This Just In
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies ]

To: Darkwolf377

For good measure:

“...since this is a board about politics and government, not morality?”

Every single public official must take an oath of office. If you think morality and politics/government don’t mix, let’s examine the definition of the word ‘oath’.

Noah Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language reads:

oath

“A solemn affirmation or declaration, made with an appeal to God for the truth of what is affirmed. The appeal to God in an oath, implies that the person imprecates his vengeance and renounces his favor if the declaration is false, or if the declaration is a promise, the person invokes the vengeance of God if he should fail to fulfill it. A false oath is called perjury.”

Now, if morality does not matter in the political arena, why would you even have to take an oath? And what is the purpose of taking the oath? I mean, if you disregarded your obligations and promises to your constituents after taking office, so what.

Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, morality is every bit as important as the LEGALITY of issues.


148 posted on 05/06/2007 11:54:51 PM PDT by This Just In
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson