State Imposed Moral Standards?

I believe too much government is a bad thing. I trust your evaluation regarding parenting to be a wise choice. I have found there to be many that cannot make wise decisions because of their environments they are in. I recall a student standing toe to toe with a teacher regarding the treating of a situation similarly to what you touched on. The student argued the teacher had no idea what it was like trying to handle an angry ghetto woman who wielded a knife. Point taken. The teacher lived in an upper class neighborhood and had been kept from that type of lifestyle.
When people are in the position to make wise decisions it is best they make their own. Poor and impoverished people do not always make wise decisions based on their need to survive.
I feel morals and ethics should be more as guidelines and possibly taught and experienced rather than ruled by a government. I do believe a governing body should use morals in their decisions to better govern the people, as Solomon prayed for understanding so that he could better rule and thus serve his people.
I do question where the line is drawn, though. Morals should be taught and experienced, but should also be rewarded in our youth with at least words uplifting to their hearts. I prefer to be open-minded regarding freedom of choice on most issues, but also have to give place for certain morality that should not be acceptable in society. continuing
While I do not condone the dragging through the streets of a corpse, I feel that to be an extreme example of what I feel was intended. I feel morals should be reflected in our laws. The lack of morality is also the opposite extreme of what I feel was intended. I do believe omnipotence to also be an extreme definition of knowing what is moral and what is not. Most people will admit certain things to be immoral, the same as most people may agree on what is moral. Tantamount immorality in a society should not be the end result of freedom of choice or the society itself will end up suffering from it.
What a joy it is to see a child make a great decision. Having too much government making those decisions would take away entirely too much from life experience. Life experience is, after all, mostly what most would want for their children....I think.

 

Hey! State imposed moral standards are awesome! As long as they are my moral standards.

 

:rockon:

 

I was thinking of starting a thread very similar to this all week.

If you have a moral standard, then the last thing you want near it is the state. A state uses coercive power and that more or less will completely undermine whatever value is inherent within a moral.

 

No. States and morality simply don't mix.

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Under that moral proposition, then you can use coercion if you don't mind others using coercion towards you.

 

Rewrite your morals?

 

use of coercion is against my morals...

my morals no man will take away from me... they cannot and will not steal them...

 

My object is to share some rather interesting ideals a certain group of mostly intellectuals from years past that have somewhat been lost between the cracks in the floors of our heritage. I only wish to share, and dare not offer opinions at this time....that will come later. The involvement of government on moral issues may be the theme of this thread, but I do find place for these most valuable men's words in the discussion of rather the involvement of morals in our government, if I may find place for the two comparisons to be the one and the same. Please ask me to delete this, tovlo, should you find it in any way out of order or context and I will be delighted to. Please note the abject attitudes of those that helped secure a place in this world for our government when the thought of the absence of religion and morality was even thought to be removed from the
foundations of this new government: America.
I will continue to add til I tire with editing.....
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indespensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. from George Washington's Farewell Address

We have no government armed with the power capable with contending with human passions, unbridled by morality and true religion. Our Constitution is made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
Statemen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone, which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free Constitution is pure virtue, and if this cannot be inspired into our People
in a greater Measure than they have it now, they may change their rulers and the forms of government, but they will not obtain a lasting liberty. John Adams

I proceed in the next place, to enquire, what mode of education we shall adopt so as to secure to the state all the advantages that are to be derived from the proper instruction of youth; and here I beg leave to remark, that the only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be laid in Religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments. Benjamin Rush

Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time.
They therefore that are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure and which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments. US Senator Charles Carroll

From the Leader of the Boston Tea Party.....
The rights and freedom being given of the Almighty...The rights of the colonists as Christians...may be best understood by reading and carefully studying the institution of The Great Law Giver and Head of the Christian Church, which are to be found clearly written and promulgated in the New Testament.
as the Declaration of Independence was being signed...
We have this day restored the Sovereign to Whom all men ought to be obedient. He reigns in Heaven and from the rising to the setting of the sun, let His Kingdom come.
to James Warren, 1779....
A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when they lose their virtue they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader....If virtue and knowledge are diffused among the people, they will never be enslaved. This will be their great security.
from the Public Advisor..... Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.
Samuel Adams, who has so much more to say

The principles of morality and religion are the best foundation of national happiness.
James Madison, 1785

The great pillars of all government and of social life are virtue, morality, and religion. This is the armor, my friend, and this alone that renders us invincible. These are the tactics we should study. If we lose these, we are conquered, fallen indeed...so long as our manners and principles remain sound, there is no danger. Patrick Henry, 1789

Whoever shall introduce into public affairs the principals of primitive Christianity will change the face of the world. Benjamin Franklin, 1778

from one known to many as the Father of the Bill of Rights...No free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people, but by a firm adherence to justive, moderation, temperence, frugality and virtue, and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles. George Mason, written into the Virginia Declaration of Rights
I momentarily tire a bit

 

Big surprise. JM thinks that Christianity should be enforced by the state.

But I can post a long list of quotes by notable public figures as well...

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ed_buckner/quotations.html#II

"All persons shall have full and free liberty of religious opinion; nor shall any be compelled to frequent or maintain any religious institution": freedom for religion, but also freedom from religion. (Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, p. 38. Jefferson proposed his language in 1776.)

It seems men like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison have been "lost" between the cracks of JM's heritage.

 

Satya, do not place words in my mouth; I can speak for my own self.

 

Why is it that what men 330 years ago wrote is taken as such an authority for resolving this now? I think it's more relevant if it is right or wrong, and for the time as it is now.


State imposed religion? No way. It's a disgusting concept.
State imposed morality? To an extent you have to have it. Ideally the state should be maximizing liberty for its citizens while keeping them from encroaching on each others' liberties. Murder is illegal because you encroach on the liberty of one's life when you murder someone. However, the state should endeavor to get involved with peoples' morality to the least extent possible...which it currently certainly does not do.

 

I find it interesting to study how these men that many years ago were fleeing a governing authority that had something missing in it. I also find it interesting how they gathered to make a Constitution that would better serve the people than the government or governments they were leaving
armed with experience and knowledge. I find it interesting how a society can forget how their country was founded and why.
I also find your questions interesting and will ponder them. Thank you for your candor and thank you for the way you ask your questions. I have come to appreciate the way you bring this other personality into our discussions.

 

People seem to talk about them as if they are the absolute authority, and what they say is what we should follow. It's almost like people don't understand that the founding fathers were fallible men who can be just as wrong about things as anyone else.

Idk, maybe I'm mistaking you all for a bunch of Si functioning peoples (which you all are obviously not) that look to the past to resolve nearly all questions. It's interesting what these men had to say about things, it's just that their opinions are so often taken as the absolute authority for how American government should be run.

 

That's 230 years, assuming you're talking about the founding fathers of the U.S.
You bring up a good point. Why must we judge our government according to an old document? Why is the Constitution assumed to be perfect (except for the occasional amendment)? Would it be so wrong to rewrite it?