Posted on 11/22/2002 6:01:00 AM PST by riley1992
Now do you see the slippery slope your argument is on.... ?
I really want to know, if such a country exits, I may consider looking for a job there. I know obscenity is more rampant in many other nations, but I don't take the public nature of obscenity to be a good gauge of personal liberty.
Maybe Belize is more free, but the government can be crooked there, and large, international environmental groups own much of the land there, so... I don't know which country a person could come from with room to talk about personal liberty.
Absolutely they should. They should be ridiculed to the point where the people repeal the laws for no other reason than that they are tired of being razzed about them. Bad laws, when they are Unconstitutional, should be struck down by the Supreme Court, but when they are Constitutional, they cannot be. But being Constitutional doesn't make them good laws. A patriotic citizen, therefore, should exercise his First Amendment right in speaking out against such laws, until their supporters become too heartily ashamed of themselves to support them anymore. Ridicule is a very effective tool for this: Jay Leno is worth a thousand holy rollers.
In this way, the majority will become a minority. That's what's going on here. Nobody's trying to override the Will of the Majority; the point is to try to change the Will of the Majority. Why would you object to that?
The drunk matter is an issue. If the prosecutors are going after her for sex toys, well, it's no wonder we have much work ahead of us concerning terrorism.
The Puritan Paradise of Texas.
LOL! Really LOL!!!
"What is your definition of justice?"May your gears clank lightly within you, and may posterity forget that you were our countryman.
"Justice, Elijah, is that which exists when all the laws are enforced."
Fastolfe nodded. "A good definition, Mr. Baley, for a robot.... A human being can recognize the fact that, on the basis of an abstract moral code, some laws may be bad ones and their enforcement unjust. What do you say, R. Daneel?"
"An unjust law," said R. Daneel evenly, "is a contradiction in terms."
-- Isaac Asimov (The Caves Of Steel)
My my, your attempts at sarcasm when you're on the losing side are very gratifying. States have constitutions also. Their purpose is the same as the fed's namely to restrict the governments activities. In fact there isn't a single state that doesn't have one. (and not a sigle state that hasn't exceeded its constitutional authority) Not having looked through every state constitution, I can's say for a fact that what is true for GA is true for all of them, but Ga's constitution likewise says nothing about it being the duty of the legislature to set public standards for morality.
Furthermore, it is disingenuous of you to suggest that the founding fathers were so fearful of government that they wanted to restrict the role of the federal government, but had no such qualms about the state governments.
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.