Posted on 02/18/2011 10:20:56 PM PST by TCH
1. Marriage is first a religious exercise, second recognized by the state. (Note: the second is unecessary, but I doubt you want to give up that imprimatur.)
2. Morality actually cannot be legislated within the States by the federal authorities. If the federal government has any jurisdiction over any citizen for any matter whatsoever within a State the Constitution itself is a dead letter. Federalism and republicanism, words that are little understood by patriots with hidden agendas.
3. We are so far gone that I can’t even consider some of what you say seriously. Abortion? If you want to end it you will have to get Roe v. Wade overturned, and then you will have to convince California to outlaw it. Let’s work on getting the federal government back in its constitutional cage TC. I think that will bring the moral order you seek.
GeronL, I just noticed TCH’s tagline. Crystal clear.
Perhaps not (I fully admit that I could not get myself to finish reading that prattle), but that seemed to be the gist of what he was wanting.
I'm all for social codes of morality to keep our society glued together, I just don't think that it's wise or even possible to dictate morality from the top-down. Everyone, even the most God-fearing people, are going to have areas of moral disagreement. For example, I once had one family member send another family member a letter stating that the first one was going to hell simply because that person did not attend the second's specific church, even though that person is a very devout, church-going Christian. That is the path of madness. I get rubbed the wrong way by those who try to impose their narrow standards on everyone else.
I like your style
I wasn’t intending to post a comment to you. Apologies. However I can think of little that is less moral than regulating the lives of others and commanding their actions in the name of a communal well being. In the end it does not matter if the libertarian is good. Nor does it matter that if the libertarian is bad. So long as they are not disturbing the rights or property of others such judgments are meaningless.
It’s obvious you have no idea what libertarianism is about, other than the caricature that you use to beat up.
I’m sorry, thecabal, but your anecdote is a red herring.
Our country and constitutional form of government is based on a moral foundation. Without this moral foundation, you have a relativistic society. And a relativist society cannot function without anarchy.
Sure I will, right after the world becomes perfect.
2. Morality is legislated everyday in this country by the government. 3. Abortion? Really? So wanting to stop murdering babies is something you consider an extreme and far out position?
It is inaccurate to describe laws which protect the rights of individual Americans as constituting regulation.
Regulation is a rule by which to subject its subtenancy by the management of a governing body.
Law is an established rule by which society adheres to in order to protect the common good and rights of individuals.
1. Marriage: a religious and social practice, yes; however, more precisely a sacrament, which, as ordained and defined by God, is the exclusive perpetual union between one man and one woman, for thew purpose of pro-creating the human race, so to fulfill God’s will.
The state has no business in either redefining that union or subjecting its bond to a subversive third-party contract for the sake of undermining the God-vested authority of the parents. The intention of the marriage “license” is to make the state a party to the marriage, and, moreover, the principle party having ultimate power over the contract it negotiated. “License” implies “privilege” not “right,” and a privilege may be revoked at the whim of the granter.)
2. The federal government exercises all manner of jurisdiction over the states and the individuals residing therein—the Constitution notwithstanding. What hidden agenda? I plainly stated my argument.
3. Abortion: Did or did not the federal government, by way of one of its three branches, determine as a matter of law that some human beings are less equal than others (as they once did prior via Dred Scott) and thus undeserving of “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”? You ignore the central issue at hand—the unjustified taking of an innocent human life — and moreover, taking the life of an American citizen WITHOUT DUE PROCESS and where NO CAPITAL CRIME HAS BEEN COMMITTED AGAINST ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL OR THE STATE. So the federal government, by way of its Supreme Court—Nine individuals—has condemned to death countless millions of innocent American children... and further, spread that principle across the globe. The irony is that abortion is a communist practice, first advanced by Marxist thought, and those who favored eugenics to rid society of its “lesser” members. Now, how does that all square up with your libertarian viewpoint of “non-interference”?
Bookmark
True. America cannot sustain a Republic without a moral people. But you don’t get a moral people by mandating morality, that is putting the cart before the horse. You get a sustainable FREE REPUBLIC when the people deserve it. What we have now is what we deserve. If we as a people will educate ourselves, care once again about our glorious history, and prostrate ourselves before God, then we will naturally begin to reacquire the foundations of our great Country. The Founders didn’t install a “morals clause” in the Constitution to keep us moral, they knew that such a mandate would have been ignored like all the rest if we so chose.
But anyway, what would a moral government look like? I think a government that doesn't force its citizens to buy goods they don't want is a good start. Maybe defend me from those who would infringe on my freedom. Assure that evil doers are punished?
How moral is sovereign debt default? Do you have a problem with the US defaulting on its debts (including Social Security)?
subtenancy = subordinates
My apologies for the typo
Hidden agenda of the libertarians seems to be drugs and sex for or with kids. Some of them deny it and say they stand by the Constitution (which lists no age of consent of course). There have been a couple of times where a FReeper did openly admit to me that they think 13 year olds are perfectly capable of being adults. (hahaha)
.....
I’m kind of libertarian on economics, I don’t think the government should even own roads or libraries and I am perfectly willing to privatize the fire department. lol.
But I would never sacrifice children to the altar of libertarianism.
“Wanting to stop the murdering of babies...” OK, if you really want to stop the baby killers, the next time one them is killed by a pro-life activist and you sit on the Jury at his murder trial, vote to acquit. If enough vigilante pro-life activists are set free abortion doctors will close up shop. Think I’m kidding? I’m not. But when the most recent example occurred the Jury voted unanimously to convict. What would you do GeronL?
53 Million to 3 or something like it and you shed more tears over imaginary abortion doctors than real dead babies in the millions.
That is hardly even human.
So you want to set up a straw man and knock it down too.
Our Founding Fathers did not include a “moral clause” because their form of government was inspired by and designed with a moral foundation. You sight our early glorious history and yet you failed to recognize the reasons why America was once a glorious country.
Every states constitution invokes the name of God. This isn’t just a word, but it represents a foundational belief and regard for God’s moral law within our society.
Our Founding Fathers designed this republic, and penned the Constitution with the understanding that society would live by a moral standard set by God. And by these moral standards, men and women in this country could live side by side in a civilized society without infringing on one an-others rights within the law.
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.