[ellery]

By the way, for all of you who think government should be in the business of deciding what's moral (instead of people, societies, communities deciding what's moral), consider this:
-Our government is a long way toward considering guns immoral.
-Our government is a long way toward considering the condemnation of homosexuals immoral (even if it's part of one's religion)

Should I go on? Still think it's a good idea to give government the power to decide the country's morals? Because they might not decide the way you want them to.

[gcruse]

Should I go on? Still think it's a good idea to give government
the power to decide the country's morals? Because they might not
decide the way you want them to.

Kevin has this problem, see?  He favors outlawing
vice,  immorality, marujuana and victimless crimes
because they degrade society.  The problem is that
by outlawing such a huge chunk of human behavior,
Kevin's lifestyle laws are turning most Americans
into scofflaws if not outright criminals.  This has
the effect of corroding citizenship which leads
to a degrading of society.  Kevin is causing that
which he laments.  In addition, he rails against
nanny government, even as the bureaucracy
necessary to fulfull his will becomes it.

Unfortunately, Kevin is not unique.

[tpaine]

Our government is a long way toward considering guns immoral.

---

You would be amazed at how many 'conservatives' here at FR, think that state governments have the 'right' to, in effect, consider guns immoral, and regulate the possession of so called assault weapons as does California.

-- Texasforever is one such. - Mindboggling, no?