-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The US Government and morality
- Thread starter dyanaprajna2011
- Start date
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Goverment is a system of force. Not morality.
It should run in a manner however as to keep society civil.
It should run in a manner however as to keep society civil.
Pink Top Hat
Active Member
and are morals not how they achieve a civil society?
McBell
Unbound
I have no idea how you got the idea that I eliminate anything from it.
Interesting how you have still not answered the question:
You think it is because of "morality" that theft, rape and murder are illegal?
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
You would think that to a degree, yet the methodology of goverment used is far less moral in order to achieve that civility. Its clearly a system of brute force forcing compliance creating a paradox imo.
A person in authority can hold a view of morality, and achieve a degree of civility overall, but still nonetheless uses that system of force to do it.
You're classifying rape, theft, and murder as being illegal for reasons other than morality.
What other reasons?
Sure.
Human behavior is the collective set of things they do in societies, and groups tend to try to eliminate behaviors that are harmful to the group. They're not always particularly accurate (by either eliminating behavior that is not harmful, or failing to eliminate behavior that is harmful). Rape, theft, and murder are among the most harmful behaviors in a group.
McBell
Unbound
And that's what makes them immoral.
McBell
Unbound
round and round we go.
Because you're seeming to place a distinction in there somewhere without explaining why, where I don't view any distinction to exist.
This sums it up nicely. Government chooses to enforce laws that impede on what we consider unalienable rights. Really it should go without saying that people should not murder, rape or steal but we should at least be trying to stop someone who decides they want to go ahead and do those things.
If morality is a matter of conscience, than government enforcing it would be a false morality, no?
moral
a : of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : ethical <moral judgments>
b : expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior <a moral poem>
c : conforming to a standard of right behavior
d : sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgment <a moral obligation>
e : capable of right and wrong action <a moral agent>
2
: probable though not proved : virtual <a moral certainty>
3
: perceptual or psychological rather than tangible or practical in nature or effect <a moral victory> <moral support>
The tangible or practical in nature part is the appropriate area for government law enforcement, not the psychological or perceptual. That would be mind control, and the thought police.a : of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : ethical <moral judgments>
b : expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior <a moral poem>
c : conforming to a standard of right behavior
d : sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgment <a moral obligation>
e : capable of right and wrong action <a moral agent>
2
: probable though not proved : virtual <a moral certainty>
3
: perceptual or psychological rather than tangible or practical in nature or effect <a moral victory> <moral support>