Replies

To some extent, every law is a legislation of morality (as a principle). Should we take, “Thou shalt not kill”, or “thou shalt not steal”, out of our criminal codes as well...since they are legislations of morality?

One has to view the government as an institution that secures certain rights at the expense of other rights. In an anarchy, you can go around, killing/stealing/raping/burning, etc. You have infinite "rights:" the right to life, the right to kill, the right to your possessions, the right to steal, etc. Many of these "rights" are incompatible with each other, and hence they are tenuous; my right to life would be in conflict with someone else's right to kill. A government is there to secures everyone's right to life at the expense of everyone's "right" to kill, in order to maintain stability.

As another poster who replied to me mentioned, legislating morality causes a problem because one must pick whose morality to legislate. Somebody else mentioned that this is a Judeo-Christian nation, and as such, those morals are the ones to be enforced. However, examine the growing Muslim population. If/when they have the majority, it won't be your morality that is legislated.

One has to view the government as an institution that secures certain rights at the expense of other rights. In an anarchy, you can go around, killing/stealing/raping/burning, etc. You have infinite "rights:" the right to life, the right to kill, the right to your possessions, the right to steal, etc. Many of these "rights" are incompatible with each other, and hence they are tenuous; my right to life would be in conflict with someone else's right to kill. A government is there to secures everyone's right to life at the expense of everyone's "right" to kill, in order to maintain stability.

I have to somewhat disagree with this, as the Founders never insinuated there was ever a 'right to kill' like they did a person's 'right to live'. Our rights are not granted by the Constitution; they exist independent of any human institution, the Constitution merely lists *some* of them. I would suggest that a 'right to kill' doesn't exist, where we define kill as murder. Obviously, a person also has the right to use deadly force to defend themselves, but that's a different matter. In this framework, Anarchy exists when there is no coherent force tasked with preventing the infringement of individual rights; it does not constitute a state in which there is suddenly this 'right to kill, rape, pillage, and burn'. You are, however, absolutely correct in that those things would happen in a state of Anarchy. This is why the Declaration of Independence states that to secure our rights, governments are instituted among men by consent of the governed. This is why government exists, period: to secure individual rights from infringement.

I agree that government is a “necessary evil”. It is required to restrain the impulses of a fallen/sinful humanity. Government is an institution of God, given out of his kindness to man, and to preserve something of his crowning achievement in creation:

Genesis 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

There is no “right to kill”, it is wrong to kill. This has always been. It is just to punish the guilty. That is why capital punishment is just...and abortion is murder.

Our founders appealed to “self evident truth”. Man inherently knows the difference between right and wrong (in an imperfect, fallible way, but he does have a conscience).

You wrote: “one must pick whose morality to legislate”.

The founders did just that. They chose Moses, and the Bible.

The moral code (law) given in the Ten Commandments were written by the finger of God. The Old Testament laws are largely the basis of our criminal and civil codes to this day.

If one follows the New Testament standard 1) to love God, and 2) to love their neighbor as theirself, then the Ten Commandments are no longer needed as they are contained in the two.

The reason we have a government with the power of justice and defense is to protect us from fallen/sinful humanity within our borders, or without (all enemies foreign and domestic).

And of course, if the Muslims take over, Christian morality won’t be legislated, as Islam has always been a religion of the sword, its devoted followers forcefully subjugating all who oppose it.

But that is no reason to abandon our system of self-government. Rather we must realize the Judeo-Christian foundation of our system and repair it. History and the present governments around the world are graphic examples of the alternative(s).

Your RIGHTS, actually, do not ever include a right to violate the rights of others. There is not, EVER, a right to kill/rape/loot or whatever, as these activities ALWAYS violate the rights of another. Society exists to allow people to interact with each other in peaceable ways. Governments exist in order to ensure that EVERYONE’S rights are protected. Otherwise, your argument is headed in the right (correct) direction.