Page 3 of 27 FirstFirst 1234567813 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 536
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by jjeffcoat View Post
    Hopefully, it is the beginning of the purge of the RINO's.
    I say purge them all, and replace them with the morality police. How does legislating morality or hygiene square with personal freedom?

    Vote yes to the circular firing squad!
    "When there is no more room in hell, the dead will walk the earth"


    PM me your questions, If I cant find an answer, I'll show you who can.
  2. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by mrloserpunk View Post
    I say purge them all, and replace them with the morality police. How does legislating morality or hygiene square with personal freedom?

    Vote yes to the circular firing squad!
    I don't know about hygiene but any law not based in legislating morality is a bad law.
  3. #43  
    The conundrum we face in the political landscape of today, is that the Republicans LIE and the Democrats are STUPID!

    The GOP is being held hostage by this right wing lunatic tea party fringe, that just makes stuff up, and their leaders are Beck and Palin, and the Democrats that could have pretty much done whatever the F they wanted for the last 2 years, had this misguided glaze that if they play nice, could win some votes.

    So instead of REAL health care reform, that yes, ok scary word oooo, would have could have SHOULD have BEEN a single payer system like every other civilized country has, accepted the watered down wus of a health care reform, that the right , plays the endless soundbites about it being Obamacare, and a govt take over which it is NOT. In fact its a more conservative plan than Nixon would have accepted. They LIE!

    The Democrats, instead of shouting their case, as well as the real accomplishments of this administraton, given what it was handed to start with, just sorta goes of off in a corner and hopes people will realize it. They are STUPID!

    Republicans bluster about cutting the deficit, and halting spending, how thats whats ruining our ecomomy, but heaven forbid, we end the HUGE tax cuts for the wealthy to maybe recoup some revenue, or even worse, talk about the zillions we have wasted in not only lives by MONEY on 2 really moronic wars. Yet they go on and on about less government, except the government THEY want. They LIE!

    The Democrats keep putting up the most inane, and NON charismatic people for elections, that do nothing for the party or its ideals. Is it really possible in a country of 300 million people, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are the BEST we can find? They are STUPID!

    It saddens me, that even the people who I agree with politically, are either just plain stupid, or are stupid, unelectable and/or have shady pasts.

    Im a fairly politically savvy person, but the current state of affairs just makes me wanna hurl!
    I have always been a "Phone" person. My love of "Phones" started at an early age. Avatar to the left, is circa 1952, see the sparkle in my lil toddler eyes
    Cell History: Bag Phone, Brick Phone, Various Micro Tacs, Treo's, Centro, the PRE!


    I Pre

  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    I don't know about hygiene but any law not based in legislating morality is a bad law.
    I disagree. You cannot legislate morality. Laws can force behavior but they cannot change hearts or minds. As an unfortunate example, civil rights legislation did not rid us of racists, it only impeded their activities. I defer to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. who said it much more eloquently than me:

    morality cannot be legislated, behavior can be regulated. It may be true that the law cannot change the heart but it can restrain the heartless. It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me but it can keep him from lynching me
    Last edited by cellmatrix; 09/16/2010 at 03:25 PM. Reason: fixed link
  5. #45  
    Isn't that because lynching you would be immoral?
    My device history:

    - Jim J.

    (On Sprint for many years)
  6. #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by jjeffcoat View Post
    Isn't that because lynching you would be immoral?
    In your view or the lyncher's view?
  7. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix View Post
    I disagree. You cannot legislate morality. Laws can force behavior but they cannot change hearts or minds. As an unfortunate example, civil rights legislation did not rid us of racists, it only impeded their activities. I defer to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. who said it much more eloquently than me:

    morality cannot be legislated, behavior can be regulated. It may be true that the law cannot change the heart but it can restrain the heartless. It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me but it can keep him from lynching me
    I'm not saying you can change anyone's morality but laws are intended to enforce entities to act in moral ways. Whether it be civil law, contract law, property law, etc. Laws, or at least good laws, are intended to make sure peoples, businesses, governments, or any other group act rightly towards one another and among ourselves.
  8. #48  
    Not talking about whose view... is lynching immoral, or isn't it?
    My device history:

    - Jim J.

    (On Sprint for many years)
  9. #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by jjeffcoat View Post
    Not talking about whose view... is lynching immoral, or isn't it?
    In my view it is,and by your tone, it seems you agree. However, there are some folks who may think differently. You can't change the way they think by laws. You can stop them from acting on what they think but you can't change how they think.
  10. #50  
    I agree that you can't change what they think, but why have a law to stop them from acting on that belief in the first place?
    My device history:

    - Jim J.

    (On Sprint for many years)
  11. #51  
    To take a different example, I may think that its immoral to discriminate against a gay couple by not allowing them the same rights of marriage as a heterosexual couple. Others may think it immoral to allow a gay couple to have those rights. By adopting laws to enforce one morality or the other, it is not going to change my moral view or the moral view of others who may disagree with me.
  12. #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by jjeffcoat View Post
    I agree that you can't change what they think, but why have a law to stop them from acting on that belief in the first place?
    You have a law to change a person's behavior, not to change their morality.
  13. #53  
    But surely there must be some purpose in adopting the law one way or the other, whichever is chosen.
    My device history:

    - Jim J.

    (On Sprint for many years)
  14. #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix View Post
    You have a law to change a person's behavior, not to change their morality.
    But why change their behavior?
    My device history:

    - Jim J.

    (On Sprint for many years)
  15. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #55  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix View Post
    To take a different example, I may think that its immoral to discriminate against a gay couple by not allowing them the same rights of marriage as a heterosexual couple. Others may think it immoral to allow a gay couple to have those rights. By adopting laws to enforce one morality or the other, it is not going to change my moral view or the moral view of others who may disagree with me.
    Perhaps the language is confusing. When I say “legislating morality” I don’t mean legislating what your morals are. I mean, the laws are based in assuring people act rightly (morally) towards one another. Thus, they are legislating moral actions without regard to one's own personal moral convictions--or lack thereof, as the case may be. In fact, it is the lack thereof which necessitates most laws, is it not? If people all had the same moral standard, and the capability and desire to act within that moral standard, there would be no need for laws of any kind.
  16. #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    And that is the definition of giving up.
    No.

    It's the definition of reality.
  17. #57  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    Perhaps the language is confusing. When I say “legislating morality” I don’t mean legislating what your morals are. I mean, the laws are based in assuring people act rightly (morally) towards one another. Thus, they are legislating moral actions without regard to one's own personal moral convictions--or lack thereof, as the case may be. In fact, it is the lack thereof which necessitates most laws, is it not? If people all had the same moral standard, and the capability and desire to act within that moral standard, there would be no need for laws of any kind.
    You can call a particular law moral if you wish. But even if I follow the law out of fear of retribution, I can still dispute your opinion of its morality.
  18. #58  
    To the honest politician thing...

    You know why we can't find an honest politician?

    two reasons:

    1: People LIE! It's human nature, everybodie lies for one reason or another.

    2: we would never beleive them. Even if someone came out, that never lied, people would still think he's lying.


    Am I right birthers?
  19. #59  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix View Post
    To take a different example, I may think that its immoral to discriminate against a gay couple by not allowing them the same rights of marriage as a heterosexual couple. Others may think it immoral to allow a gay couple to have those rights. By adopting laws to enforce one morality or the other, it is not going to change my moral view or the moral view of others who may disagree with me.
    Actually views change all the time based off what's considered moral. I at one time may have considered something moral, but laws that condemn that behavior later causes me to rethink my morals.
  20. #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by dbdoinit View Post
    No.

    It's the definition of reality.
    Then your reality is one of defeatism.

    Your statement leaves absolutely no room for optimism that an elected gov't can work.

    Now, if I'm taking you too literally/concretely and that what you may actually mean is that elected officials are prone to being tempted to self interests and not serve the will of the people without eternal vigilance by the people and the rotten ones moved out for fresh effective politicians for the people, then I would agree with you.
Page 3 of 27 FirstFirst 1234567813 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions