Legislating Morality
 

Ah, smoking is not good for you, and it's been deemed that anything not good for you is bad; hence, illegal.-Lenina Huxley, Demolition Man

One of the most repeated complaints against social conservatism is that you "cannot legislate morality." What is meant by this is that you cannot make people better through law, and people who try are not simply mistaken, but actually tyrannical by trying to force their ethical ideology down everyone else's throats. We're told this is what social conservatives want to do; ram Judeo-Christian ethics through the system and force everyone to live like a 1950's sitcom family. No drinking, no dancing, no fun.

The interesting thing, though, is that if you look at the actual record of what has been done in the past, it is actually the left which has tried to legislate morality, not the right. Consider.

In the 1970s, the left insisted that it was immoral to expect women to carry a child to birth when she didn't want to. So Roe v Wade forced legalized abortion on every state in the union. And that's just one example of what the left has done to enforce their moral vision on the rest of the nation.

Homosexual "marriage" is another such example, with left-leaning judges requiring that this be the law of various states over the will of the actual voters in most cases. In Oregon and California, leftist city and county official simply declared these unions legal without legal authority or popular support. Why? Because it was considered immoral to not allow homosexuals to marry by these people, so they used their positions of power to implement policy.


The examples go on. Leftist moral making has resulted in scores of laws and policies forced on the entire nation, such as low flow shower heads, the banning of incandescent bulbs, low capacity washing machines, nutritional information required at all restaurants (including the minimum size of the font!), bans on smoking in public places, and more.

These are all presented as moral imperatives, requirements we all must follow because it would be wrong not to do so. You're killing the planet, its a civil right, think of the children! All kids must wear bicycle helmets because its wrong to let children be hurt. All drivers must wear seat belts because it is wrong for us to be hurt in accidents. All cars must have a certain mileage per gallon because it is wrong to use that much fuel.

When the rubber hits the road, we find that it is the left, not the social conservative, who gives us legislated morality. It is the left which is using its power to try to force people into what it considers proper moral behavior. It is the left which punishes people legally for doing what it believes is wrong morally.

To be sure, there have been times in days past when the social conservative has given us such laws. The blue laws of New England's puritan past were such examples, with rules against various activity on Sundays. The prohibition of the early 20th century was another such example, with religious and morality groups demanding that the evil of demon rum be banned by law. Almost a hundred years later, the specter of those rules haunts the nation still, and although these examples are ancient, they still hold enough weight to frighten and concern voters.

If those social conservatives get power, we're told, you'll not be allowed to have any fun any more! Except... how much fun are you allowed today, in modern bubble-wrapped, nanny state America? In New York City, the mayor is ignoring a huge bedbug infestation over the terrors of salt and saturated fats. One threat is tangible and annoying, the other perceived and mothering. The left again, given power, is trying to force its morality on you.

Consider this, then, the next time someone's shrill, prudish cry warns you against the dangers of social conservatives. Who's actually cutting back on your fun and your freedom, is it the guy with the Bible or the guy with the Che Guevara tee shirt?


got this from http://rightnetwork.com/posts/legislating-morality it's a pretty good piece and slams those that yell the loudest about morality driven politics

i stopped reading when i saw the opening quote from Demolition Man.

You don't remember that movie? Everything was illegal, it was deemed unhealthy, they didn't even have sex!

wearing a seat belt is not a moral issue. this thread sucks.

You had to use the 3 seashells to wipe your ass in the bathroom, Arnold was president at some point, and Scott Peterson was in the cryoprison.

So you lied , you did read it

So was John Ashcroft a plot by the "left"? Do you condone passing legislation that tells women what they can do with their own bodies?

You really are dumb man. Seriously. Something is wrong with you.

you are using a backwards kind of logic. pushing for gay marriage can be seen as legislating morality sure but running against it is the exact same thing on the other end of the spectrum.

At first I thought, there's no way Vendzilla wrote this so I skipped to the last sentence and saw "Rightnetwork" with "legislating morality" and then "slams those that yell the loudest about morality driven politics."

I'm sure it's a fascinating piece. haha.

Thats not what the article is talking about, it was forced on us, the people voted against it and yet we are getting it because of morality. Being in this business, think, what's next?

i skimmed if after my first post. GOTCHA!

do you know what morality actually is, how it's defined?

Bitching about "forced" legalized abortion? I stopped right there. Whoever wrote that part probably has a penis and is a real cocksucker.

Sorry but I have a vagina and like my right to choose. :)

They could have used other examples and left that out.

Actually, I wrote the last sentence, just getting tired of people saying the conservatives are the boogie men when we can't even have flavored rolling papers anymore because of liberals.

i like morality

no, its not because of morality. its a human rights issue. why should the majority get to decide what the minority can and can't do?

I believe the same thing, it's the womens body, she has to make the choice

So who overturns a persons right to vote?

Is there an extra burden on taxpayers caused by smokers? If not, I don't care. Does it force me to pay more for your stupid choices? If not, I don't care. Does it put my health at risk? If not, I don't care.

As long as it won't affect me directly or indirectly, do whatever you want.

who is 'overturning' it? as far as i know there are groups appealing it but that doesn't mean it will be made legal.

Usually some groups version of right and wrong I think is the best description

Terri Shiavo

Add in making it illegal for gays to marry. There are a lot of good reasons why conservatives get flak for their stance on these issues.

Is there a party that is fiscally conservative, but also socially liberal?

That's kinda selfish

It will happen, you know it will, just like California's prop 187

Agreed.

But let me say this for what it's worth. I moved from "liberal" California to the deep south Louisiana, and there are SO many more freedoms here! So many!

They sell fireworks, you can walk around with an alcoholic beverage, they sell tons more OTC meds here than they do in Cali! You can buy back pills and things the liberals in Cali banned long ago. LOL... to name just a few things.

The local and state government harrass you and probe your anus about I'd say 20% of what California and LA does. You can get away with so much more shit down here, it is much more free than the liberal west in many ways.

I left Cali and within 60 days had the city of burbank threatening to lien on me because I sold a vehicle and the new owner got a parking ticket before he went to the dmv and it was still in our name. Just ridiculous shit.

but you could compare the south and the west all day... both have many positives and negatives in terms of liberalism.

Dude, if there was, I would join.

California has a lot of great things going for it, but entitlements, unions and sanctuary cites are killing the state. State employee's retire with 95% after just 20 years. I'm not anti union, I have two union cards. I live in redding california, they spent 23 million dollars on a glass walking bridge, the state is run by idiots and we keep electing them, I still can't believe Boxer won and Brown won, I guess no one has a memory.
Registering vehicles has always been a mess, you even have to register the ones that don't run and are sitting behind the house waiting for when you have time to fix something. Many people here drive to Oregon to buy big ticket items to save on the taxes.

Forgive vend he doesnt know his industies history.how if it wasnt for janet reno he wouldnt be in this industry.

i stop reading once i hear Left or Right

would be great when majority realizes its Them and Us

I know the history of the present pretty good, it survived and made some changes during the Bush years and affiliate programs started closing during the Obama years with democrat control.
Regulation is one thing, but a bad economy is effecting this industry

I'm with you there, for sure.

Theoretically, that party is the Libertarian party. In practice, however... the Libertarian party is basically a long-running joke. It's sort of sad to see how incapable they are of mounting any sort of serious campaign.

People who think the Democratic Party is the height of political incompetence should check out a Libertarian Party meeting sometime; the last one I went to was like open mic night at a mental institution.

NO I don't

John Ashcroft had nothing to do with Roe vs Wade.

He did hammer our industry and did little to really effect the industry except make us keep records of the models. In the last two years while the government was under democrat control, how many affiliate programs have closed their doors?

They have a good stance, and some big name players in there ranks, but the liberal press hammers them worse than they hammer Sarah Palin.
They end up having all the presence of the green party.

Legislating morality is unethical and an act of aggression. It doesn't matter who does it, the left, the right, the center... It's an act of aggression.

As long as you don't cause damage to another human being or his property, you can do whatever you want. Want to do drugs all day? Personally I think you are an idiot if you do that but hey It's your body, your life, your decision. Want to sit home all day and eat chips and watch soap opera's? No problem it's your life. Want to work hard and start your own business? No problem it's your life. Want to read the bible all day and never use a computer and never watch television? No problem, it's your life.

Want to steal my property? Now we have a problem :)

morals in the dust. - ministry

Problem is that those forces are using the law to fight what they see as problems and paying for the fight with taxes, your money, same as stealing from you.

well the article vendzilla posted is basically saying making things like gay marriage legal is legislating morality, which it is in a way but typically legislating morality is seen as taking rights away, not giving them. like i said, its backwards logic. its like saying freeing the slaves is legislating morality.

Due to legislation of morality? You tell me.

Roe V Wade had to do with abolishing the term "back alley abortion" forever. Anyone who believes this article's revisionist history at face value deserves to wallow in their own ignorance.

Young people who arent familiar with it, look it up. Dont rely on someones agenda filled opinion to sway you. Form your own. While you're at it, research the Terri Schiavo case one more time to see how far some people will go to over rule your personal choices.

problem is, that shit was written by an idiot and it suffers from severe logical flaws and a lack of understanding about the meaning of basic words.

arguing about it is like fighting with a retard whether his peanut butter sandwich tastes better with crusts on it or not.