Replies

The Forefathers wanted a religious influence in society, and wanted it to be a christian religious influence. They said so on a number of occasions. That's the simple fact of the matter.

Which Christian religious influence was, or is, the correct one? Do the Mormons have it right? The Presbyterians? The Unitarians? The Methodists? The Baptists? The Seventh-Day Adventists? The Congregationalists? Or are we supposed to believe that some amalgamation, or overlapping, of all of these Protestant sects have it right? And if so, what's the proper equation for blending it all together?

After all, if such a thing is to be the basis of secular criminal law, we should strive to get it right, shouldn't we?

In sum, while a certain morality should be the underpinning of criminal law, morality in and of itself should not dictate criminal law. Where morality and law overlap and intersect is generally a happy place, and a good one, but just as you cannot get grain from whiskey even though you can get whiskey from grain, you cannot get morality from law, even though you can extract law from morality.

as long as it wasn't a Catholic one. Or in New England, an Anglican one. Or in Virginia, a Puritan one. The "simple fact of the matter" is that you can't overlook that when you make your grand, sweeping generalization about this subject.

This is an extraordinarily trivial concern, frankly. A catholic influence works just fine. Society views things in such a way that the specific theology of right and wrong don't matter as much as what the church in general says.

Which Christian religious influence was, or is, the correct one? Do the Mormons have it right? The Presbyterians? The Unitarians? The Methodists? The Baptists? The Seventh-Day Adventists? The Congregationalists?

Government does not concern itself with which churches are the influencer in a community, sense that's not an 'official' government position anyway. Of all those you mentioned, most of them when confronted with a moral question about something being right or wrong would give pretty much the same answer. So, in short, it really doesn't matter which one. The government makes no determination about that anyway. That whole 1st Amendment thing.

In sum, while a certain morality should be the underpinning of criminal law, morality in and of itself should not dictate criminal law.

Have you not been reading my posts???? I never said that. I said that the church's teachings on morality should be the influencer, the moral conscience of the nation. I didn't say they should write our laws. Actually read the posts please....

. . . as long as it wasn't a Catholic one. Or in New England, an Anglican one. Or in Virginia, a Puritan one. The "simple fact of the matter" is that you can't overlook that when you make your grand, sweeping generalization about this subject. Which Christian religious influence was, or is, the correct one? Do the Mormons have it right? The Presbyterians? The Unitarians? The Methodists? The Baptists? The Seventh-Day Adventists? The Congregationalists? Or are we supposed to believe that some amalgamation, or overlapping, of all of these Protestant sects have it right? And if so, what's the proper equation for blending it all together?

America should be governed under Christian morality. Most of the denominations you mention there aren't even Christian. With the exception of some Baptists.

In sum, while a certain morality should be the underpinning of criminal law, morality in and of itself should not dictate criminal law. Where morality and law overlap and intersect is generally a happy place, and a good one, but just as you cannot get grain from whiskey even though you can get whiskey from grain, you cannot get morality from law, even though you can extract law from morality.

The morality that we extract law from should be Christian morality. That means no murder, theft, obscenity, contraception, prostitution, sodomy, murder, etc.