Posted on 03/28/2011 5:40:36 PM PDT by LonelyCon
Gov. Sean Parnell's appointee for the panel that nominates state judges testified Wednesday that he would like to see Alaskans prosecuted for having sex outside of marriage.
The candidate, Don Haase of Valdez, also admitted under questioning by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee that his official resume failed to disclose his leadership role in Eagle Forum Alaska, which advocates for social conservative issues. He most recently was president of the organization, but resigned when he learned of his nomination, he said.
[Snip]
Paskvan: "Do you believe [adultery] should be a crime?"
Haase: "Yeah, I think it's very harmful to have extramarital affairs. It's harmful to children, it's harmful to the spouse who entered a legally binding agreement to marry the person that's cheating on them."
Paskvan: "What about premarital affairs -- should that be a crime?"
Haase: "I think that would be up to the voters certainly. If it came before (the state) as a vote, I probably would vote for it ... I can see where it would be a matter for the state to be involved with because of the spread of disease and the likelihood that it would cause violence. I can see legitimate reasons to push that as a crime."
Haase then asked why those questions were relevant.
"You are injecting yourself into the judicial system and so I think it's fair inquiry," Paskvan replied. "If you have a motivation to limit who would be advanced to a judgeship ... then your beliefs and attitudes are important," Paskvan said.
(Excerpt) Read more at adn.com ...
I wish someone would...
So we were living in a Sharia Law Police State at the time of the founding right?
I’ve been saving myself for 32 years for my future wife... you and I are odd, I guess. ;)
Who said anything about Sharia? I merely stated that between your position of enforcement of morality and mine, mine is far far superior. By that superiority I declare my authority to enforce and punish as I please. I will depose you of your leadership and impose a more perfect moral order with more efficient and effective penalties. All the former leadership will of course have to be put to death because their leadership was immoral and an infection that must be stamped out.
Don’t open Pandora’s Box unless you want to reap the whirlwind. Your desire to return us to the colonial days may find you in the position of being the useful idiot on the wrong side of someone else’s moral order. It’s a line in the sand you can’t control.
The govt should not be legislating morality, and neither should it be funding immorality.
Yeah, so odd that marriage should be the beginning, rather than the ending, of our sex lives.
What did Martha Stewart and the ex-Gov of IL get convicted of? Lying
Lie about your income to the IRS and see what happens when they catch you.
And punishable by stoning?
Civil consequences might be in order. Social contracts of marriage don't mean much these days. Unilateral no fault divorce (first in CA and signed by Gov. Reagan) and legal biases against men do not foster a stable society.
These numerous institutional failures precede homosexual participation. It's almost a farce that one class of people want into the civil institution for its legal protections while those already empower to avail themselves of it have streamlined the escape process over 40 years.
I realize "alienation of affection" is unpopular (limited to 8 states) but feel the concept has some merit. In the mid 20th century there was considerable experimentation with social norms, certainly not all for the best. We should not feel compelled to continue such failed experiments any more than the Baby Boomers felt compelled to honor tradition or values of their parent's generation.
This is crazy. If this fella had his way, Laz would get the death penalty.
You invoked Sharia, in a pathetic attempt to equate Sharia regimes with the Judeo-Christian Natural Law systems on which this nation was founded. As for the rest of your screed, you reveal the fundamental flaw in any system that holds man to be the ultimate authority on the law, and you differ from Marxists only in degree. I am not claiming “my” authority as you suggest, you are the one doing so. Hence all you are doing is building a straw man, and a rather pathetic one at that.
As for the suggestion that you would kill anyone, I welcome you to try. You might talk a big game on an anonymous message board, but reality often dictates a far different matter entirely.
The founders didn’t believe so. Since they wrote the 1st Amendment, I’ll defer to their interpretation.
Agreed, and so are many other things that should not be legislated. IMHO
The founders believed in freedom of conscience. Freedom of conscience includes the ability to not show God the proper reverence or to outright deny him or, as is quite popular these days, to curse in his name.
Six states currently outlaw Blasphemy. So you had better not say “God damn it!” in Michigan unless you are willing to be a test case to determine the Constitutionality of such a law.
Blasphemy
1 a: the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God; b: the act of claiming the attributes of deity
2: irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable.
So what does “freedomwarrior998” consider freedom of speech then? Not worth fighting for?
It was you who responded ‘Yes’ to Mariners post:
“such laws have thousands of generations of human development behind them”
And since then we’ve had The Enlightenment and human liberty.
Ask yourself this question: Are YOU, PERSONALLY, willing to enforce such a law at the barrel of a gun? Are you willing to do so if there’s a gun pointed back at you?”
YOU opened the door to enforcing your moral code at the point of a gun. I merely took your position to the natural next step.
‘Judeo-Christian Natural Law’ is a weak, immoral version of God’s true law. If were gonna follow God’s law, I want the full Levitical, Old Testament code with all the required remedies to the last jot and tittle. Go town to town, anyone who doesn’t yield gets killed and the town burnt to the ground, just like the Israelites did in the Old Testament. It’s the only way to ensure purity and morality.
Unfortunately your moral code isn’t sufficient. You would have to submit to my superior one or suffer the punishment. Immorality can’t be tolerated in this society, we must enforce God’s law to it’s fullest extent. We must rid ourselves of evildoers.
I’ll say it again - you hold yourself up as the standard and should be put in power to enforce that standard, but someone may come along and hold you to yet a higher standard. You may find that your definition of ‘Judeo-Christian Natural Law’ doesn’t happen to agree with the person that ends up in power, and suffer the appropriate punishment. Live by the sword, die by the sword.
A blade that is nicked, cracked or poorly sharpened is that they are dangerous in use. Why? Because they tear, catch, rip, and leave the wielder exposed for the lack of care and precision he has applied.
Yet the steel, the forge and the forger are all the same as the blade of the victor. The victor wields his blade only when absolutely needed to be wielded and never goes out into the day without his blade examined for nicks, cleaned, sharpened, rubbed, the sheath, tang and handle and strapping all properly girded.
In some religions we victors call that preparation our morning prayer.
Laws against adultery, sodomy, fornication, bastardy and such quote unquote moral failings are THOUSANDS of years old. There creation and forging was a great benefit to man, and a necessity of the survival of a society of any civilized expectations. That is the tale that History tells for those who examine it with a victor's eye.
Yet there are cultures -- whole religions at times, in places, among sub-cults and in eras -- where they allow the blade to be kept, trained or wielded in bad ways. Such is the case today with much of Islam -- where fathers slaughter their daughters heinously for some accusation of a moral failing.
Yet that men will always make mistakes should we destroy the forge and chase off the forger, that no blades should ever be forged?
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.