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

To: Tailgunner Joe
Says who? Why is it not immoral to damage oneself? Why is it not playing God to determine morality in cases where one damages another?

You damage yourself in innumerable ways every day of your life. Your body belongs to you. If it doesn't, then tell me to whom it belongs?

God's law makes no mention of damage to yourself, unless it be to your immortal soul, or your otherwise relationship with Him.

The moral guide found in His Word is what we call the Golden Rule, spoken by Jesus in both Matthew and Luke. Transgression thereof is immoral. There is no way to apply the golden rule to yourself without respect to others.

We have two kinds of laws, malum in se, that which is wrong in itself and malum prohibitum, that which is wrong only because of a law. The malum prohibitum law is enacted under the states' police power, and severe strictures, none of which strictures are followed today.

These are the "crimes" you say exist that harm no one. That they exist is no way means they are right, only that a constituency, not a majority, with money and political influence got them enacted.

The government has otherwise no constitutional pathway into the private practice of a citizen, for the state is the people thereof and the constitution created the "government".

Only if he tries to harm himself.

And the only place that is valid at all is in a socialism which is by definition Godless but for the state.

God forbids many things which have nothing to do with harming others.

Possibly. I don't know everything. Show me.

108 posted on 06/02/2005 11:13:04 AM PDT by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies ]


To: William Terrell
If it doesn't, then tell me to whom it belongs?

God.

so-called "victimless" crimes (e.g. prostitution) are not crimes simply because they have been made illegal. Indeed, they are crimes because they are wrong.

I don't believe that every law that is enacted is right, even if it is passed using a moral justification, but I do believe that some "victimless" crimes are wrong, such as prostitution.

You want to ascribe a socialist justification to such laws, but I certainly haven't. Laws designed to protect an individual from himself need not be justified by any collectivist argument.

Since all those powers which are not reserved to the federal constitution are those of the states (or the people), then the states have the power to restrict such activities. Do you really believe the founders thought otherwise?

109 posted on 06/02/2005 11:26:07 AM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | 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