|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
Morality v Legality - 11/5/2008 8:33:18 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1021
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
copied from a discussion on a subject that for me must remain nameless forevermore.
quote:
So is this your prorposed standard, "moral status in most people's eyes". This is what James Madison refered to as the tyranny of the majority. This is why he faught for a federalist system. That said, nearly all, if not all, of the founding fathers were constitutionalists. That is they believed in an overarching moral code. They included a rather cumbersome amendment process as a concession to the fact that we may not get it right the first time. Not because they believed that standard should shift based on the whims of the general population.
Thus, morality needs to based on something more substantial than mob rule. Could you be clear regarding what we should use as a moral standard, or at least underlying principles.
I deny that an absolute standard of morality exists. Yes, I know you think you have one. But I know that if I ask Bob, Jakob, Mustafa, Mohandas and Tetsuji, they will all give me absolute moralities that differ in some points. They can't all be right.
On a charitable day, I'll allow that an absolute morality could exist, but there is no way that humans could ever know it. Yes, I know you think you already know what it is, but again I know that other people also think they know what it is, and you all disagree.
Thus, I believe that every person has their own subjective morality. So "what we should use as a moral standard?" Your own conscience, supported by whatever religious, ethical or philosophical beliefs pertain to a particular issue.
Certainly, all of our subjective moralities have a great deal of overlap, and a lot of this commonality is enshrined in our laws and constitution. As a pragmatic matter, this is great. Nearly every society has rules against murder, theft, etc.
Some people may think it's moral to run over pedestrians or feed broken glass to dogs, but they are in a tiny minority, and society locks them up and ignores their minority opinion.
But other issues are not as clear cut. There is no unambiguous majority opinion. If we have no access to absolute morality, we still have to decide these issues. What will be allowed. This is the matter of law. In our democracy, this is ultimately decided by popular vote. Laws and even the Constitution can be changed. People cast their votes according to the dictates of their own subjective moralities.
Is alcohol immoral? I don't think the question has any objective answer. But I know that when the 18th Amendment was passed, it was illegal in the US. And when the 21st Amendment was passed, it was legal in the US. These changes reflected the changing subjective moralities of the people.
Maybe this is the tyranny of the majority. So be it. We are stuck with that in a democracy. I am glad that many of the fundamental issues are ensconced in the Constitution, where they are hard to change (since it takes much more than a simple majority to do so).
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/5/2008 10:46:03 PM
|
|
|
MrFribbles
Posts: 1884
Joined: 1/29/2007
From: Hawaii, but I've moved around since then
Status: offline
|
quote:
I deny that an absolute standard of morality exists.
Imagine we are about to have tea together. You are sitting in my living room with me. The tea kettle begins to whistle, signaling that there is some very hot water on the stove. Now, suppose instead of using this very hot water to make tea, I pour it atop your head. Could you tell me I have done wrong?
quote:
I know that if I ask Bob, Jakob, Mustafa, Mohandas and Tetsuji, they will all give me absolute moralities that differ in some points. They can't all be right.
And this proves one doesn't exist... How? Just because something isn't known to someone doesn't mean it is false. For a long time, we had no idea the "why" behind the moon affecting the tides - does that mean the tides could do whatever they wanted?
quote:
Some people may think it's moral to run over pedestrians or feed broken glass to dogs, but they are in a tiny minority, and society locks them up and ignores their minority opinion.
Then, from your perspective, shame on society! Who are we to judge their morality? How can we really say they are wrong, if there is no absolute standard?
quote:
If we have no access to absolute morality, we still have to decide these issues. What will be allowed. This is the matter of law.
Why should law be followed?
_____________________________
You're a door without a key,
A field without a fence.
You've made a holy fool of me,
And I've thanked you ever since.
- Aaron Weiss
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 7:44:54 AM
|
|
|
abraxas
Posts: 333
Joined: 4/8/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
Imagine we are about to have tea together. You are sitting in my living room with me. The tea kettle begins to whistle, signaling that there is some very hot water on the stove. Now, suppose instead of using this very hot water to make tea, I pour it atop your head. Could you tell me I have done wrong?
He couldn't tell you that what you did is against your moral code, just like you couldn't tell me that it was against my moral code if I did it to you. No one can objectively demonstrate an absolute morality; otherwise morality would be a field of science.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 10:13:16 AM
|
|
|
MrFribbles
Posts: 1884
Joined: 1/29/2007
From: Hawaii, but I've moved around since then
Status: offline
|
quote:
He couldn't tell you that what you did is against your moral code, just like you couldn't tell me that it was against my moral code if I did it to you
So you wouldn't be upset if I did it to you? After all, I did no wrong.
_____________________________
You're a door without a key,
A field without a fence.
You've made a holy fool of me,
And I've thanked you ever since.
- Aaron Weiss
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 10:51:21 AM
|
|
|
abraxas
Posts: 333
Joined: 4/8/2008
Status: offline
|
Of course I would be upset. If I poured hot water on your head, you'd be upset, but you wouldn't be able to PROVE that I did wrong either.
edit: I mostly agree with the OP. It's not my OP so I'm going to back off for a while. I think your responses are good and I look forward to essentialsalte's replies.
< Message edited by abraxas -- 11/6/2008 11:22:14 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 11:48:31 AM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1021
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
quote:
I deny that an absolute standard of morality exists.
Imagine we are about to have tea together. You are sitting in my living room with me. The tea kettle begins to whistle, signaling that there is some very hot water on the stove. Now, suppose instead of using this very hot water to make tea, I pour it atop your head. Could you tell me I have done wrong?
You would have gone against my personal subjective moral code. Fortunately for me, since most people would agree with me that your act was wrong, it would also be illegal. You may insist that what you did obeyed your own moral code, and I would have no argument to convince you otherwise. But you would be making your case from behind bars.
quote:
And this proves one doesn't exist... How?
As I said, when I'm in a charitable mood, I'll allow that one could exist, but it is unknowable with any certainty.
quote:
does that mean the tides could do whatever they wanted?
No, the tides would do what they do with the same regularity. That regularity demonstrates that there may be some law behind it. But there is much less regularity in morality. Murder and theft are almost universally considered immoral, but many other issues appear to be a matter of taste, or the specific culture one looks at.
quote:
quote:
Some people may think it's moral to run over pedestrians or feed broken glass to dogs, but they are in a tiny minority, and society locks them up and ignores their minority opinion.
Then, from your perspective, shame on society! Who are we to judge their morality? How can we really say they are wrong, if there is no absolute standard?
That's why I'm saying there's an important difference between morality and legality. I can't pass a law that makes people convinced that poisoning dogs is wrong, but I can pass a law that makes poisoning dogs illegal. And in a democracy, the will of the majority (and their various subjective moral codes) determines the law.
quote:
Why should law be followed?
If the law accords with your personal morality, then you will have no difficulty following it. If the law does not accord with your morality, then you can either abide by your convictions and go to jail, or refrain from breaking the law and not go to jail.
As civil disobedience demonstrates, there are occasions when people clearly decide that the law should not be followed. I can't argue with them.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 12:49:50 PM
|
|
|
MrFribbles
Posts: 1884
Joined: 1/29/2007
From: Hawaii, but I've moved around since then
Status: offline
|
quote:
No, the tides would do what they do with the same regularity. That regularity demonstrates that there may be some law behind it. But there is much less regularity in morality. Murder and theft are almost universally considered immoral
Why do you think that is?
quote:
If the law accords with your personal morality, then you will have no difficulty following it. If the law does not accord with your morality, then you can either abide by your convictions and go to jail, or refrain from breaking the law and not go to jail.
That doesn't really answer my question. Why should we obey the law? Is it only for personal gain?
quote:
I can't pass a law that makes people convinced that poisoning dogs is wrong, but I can pass a law that makes poisoning dogs illegal.
Then what good is really being done? You may change actions, but you'll never change people.
_____________________________
You're a door without a key,
A field without a fence.
You've made a holy fool of me,
And I've thanked you ever since.
- Aaron Weiss
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 1:18:19 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1666
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: abraxas
quote:
Imagine we are about to have tea together. You are sitting in my living room with me. The tea kettle begins to whistle, signaling that there is some very hot water on the stove. Now, suppose instead of using this very hot water to make tea, I pour it atop your head. Could you tell me I have done wrong?
He couldn't tell you that what you did is against your moral code, just like you couldn't tell me that it was against my moral code if I did it to you. No one can objectively demonstrate an absolute morality; otherwise morality would be a field of science.
Morality is not what one demonstrates, but is a system that one uses to make decisions regarding what one should or should not do. Science is a system designed to determine what is empirically verifiable at the moment. One may choose empirical verifiablity as one of the factors in making a decision. However, morality is the choice of those factors and not the factors themselves.
Therefore, an overarching moral code would not be varified. It would be discovered. There are many things in life that are acknowledged as valid that are not scientifically varifiable. In fact most of what we discuss in this forum is not scientifically varifiable.
< Message edited by Bluethread -- 11/6/2008 1:49:31 PM >
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 1:28:34 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1021
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
quote:
No, the tides would do what they do with the same regularity. That regularity demonstrates that there may be some law behind it. But there is much less regularity in morality. Murder and theft are almost universally considered immoral
Why do you think that is?
Because societies that accept or promote murder and theft do not thrive.
quote:
That doesn't really answer my question. Why should we obey the law? Is it only for personal gain?
Like everyone else in the Los Angeles area, I speed on the freeway (when possible!). I break the law. And when I see a CHP car, I slow down. Why do I suddenly obey the law? Because I'm afraid of getting caught and punished.
Avoiding jail is a sufficient reason to obey the law, but not necessarily the only one. I do lend some credence to the idea of the social contract. To live in a society, we (at least implicitly) surrender certain rights for the good of the whole. We obey laws and authority, so that society is the better for it. If you live in the hills around Los Angeles, the law requires you to clear the brush from your land, so that wildfires cannot spread to other people's homes. If you believe in the social contract, you willingly go to this extra expense for the good of the whole. Even if you don't believe in the social contract, you may do it to avoid a fine. Whatever your reason, society is improved.
quote:
Then what good is really being done? You may change actions, but you'll never change people.
That's fine with me. I only want to use laws to dictate behavior for the betterment of society, not thoughts. Do you really want a thought police?
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 1:47:03 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1021
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
Morality is not what one demonstrates, but is a system that one uses to make decisions regarding what one should or should not do.
Since it is not objectively demonstratable, any particular moral code that "one uses" is subjective.
quote:
Therefore, an overarching moral code would not varified. It would be discovered.
How would you propose to discover it?
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 2:33:38 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1666
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
Morality is not what one demonstrates, but is a system that one uses to make decisions regarding what one should or should not do.
Since it is not objectively demonstratable, any particular moral code that "one uses" is subjective.
quote:
Therefore, an overarching moral code would not varified. It would be discovered.
How would you propose to discover it?
It could be presented to you or you could determine it by trial and error.
Most of us have it presented to us. I can not verify this, but I am not aware of anyone who has survived without a moral code being impossed upon them by whomever accepted responsibility for their survival.
Thus, unless one was deposited on a rock and provided for oneself all ones life, we have all discovered a moral code. The question them becomes, how does one differentiate between these various codes.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 3:07:10 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1021
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
How would you propose to discover it?
It could be presented to you or you could determine it by trial and error.
Most of us have it presented to us. I can not verify this, but I am not aware of anyone who has survived without a moral code being impossed upon them by whomever accepted responsibility for their survival.
Thus, unless one was deposited on a rock and provided for oneself all ones life, we have all discovered a moral code.
Ok, I think I misread your previous statement. By 'overarching', I was thinking 'absolute' or 'objective'. Yes, I agree we all discover our own moral code, based on our own experiences and the things we have been taught or had presented to us.
quote:
The question them becomes, how does one differentiate between these various codes.
Correct, and I don't see any objective way to do so. Any rule you use to differentiate them will itself be subjective. One could say that the moral code should minimize the pain experienced by the people in that society. Or one could say that the moral code should maximize the pleasure experienced by the people in that society. These rules will give different moral codes, and there is no objective way to determine which rule is the 'right' one to use.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 4:36:09 PM
|
|
|
MrFribbles
Posts: 1884
Joined: 1/29/2007
From: Hawaii, but I've moved around since then
Status: offline
|
essentialsaltes,
I suppose I should have asked this from the get-go, since it will help guide my responses. Do you consider yourself to be a Christian?
_____________________________
You're a door without a key,
A field without a fence.
You've made a holy fool of me,
And I've thanked you ever since.
- Aaron Weiss
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 4:40:22 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1021
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
essentialsaltes,
I suppose I should have asked this from the get-go, since it will help guide my responses. Do you consider yourself to be a Christian?
No. I am not a Christian.
Sorry for any confusion.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 5:00:05 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1666
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
Correct, and I don't see any objective way to do so. Any rule you use to differentiate them will itself be subjective. One could say that the moral code should minimize the pain experienced by the people in that society. Or one could say that the moral code should maximize the pleasure experienced by the people in that society. These rules will give different moral codes, and there is no objective way to determine which rule is the 'right' one to use.
The problem here is the wormhole effect. One can not use the a term to define itself. What is right or correct is a judgement call and one must have a standard by which to make a judgement.
Therefore, one must start with a premise and determine if that premise holds, both internally, can one live with it, and externally, does it match what is going on around such an one.
So, that is why I ask, which premise or premises do you prefer?
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 5:42:50 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1021
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
So, that is why I ask, which premise or premises do you prefer?
I have multiple warring premises, and I aim for compromise among them all. I don't see that listing the premises would be helpful, since again I choose these premises through a subjective personal preference.
I don't think it's a wormhole to say that I prefer the morals I prefer. Why do I like the color purple better than orange, or Beethoven over Mozart? I just do.
But among my premises would be:
minimizing sadness/pain
maximizing happiness/pleasure
maximizing liberty/freedom
minimizing discrimination
maximizing equality
setting penalties that fit the crimes
ensuring the safety of the society
respecting personal property
recognizing that some fraction of personal property should be pooled in order to further the other goals and premises
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 5:58:01 PM
|
|
|
MrFribbles
Posts: 1884
Joined: 1/29/2007
From: Hawaii, but I've moved around since then
Status: offline
|
quote:
No. I am not a Christian.
Sorry for any confusion.
No need to apologize. This is actually a relief, because if a fellow Christian had been supporting the worldview you are, I would have been very worried. Since you are not a Christian, though, it makes sense.
Though I must admit, it still baffles me that someone could say that, for some, raping and murdering a child isn't wrong.
_____________________________
You're a door without a key,
A field without a fence.
You've made a holy fool of me,
And I've thanked you ever since.
- Aaron Weiss
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 6:42:50 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1021
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
Though I must admit, it still baffles me that someone could say that, for some, raping and murdering a child isn't wrong.
Again, obviously I think doing so is wrong. And most criminals, I expect, know the difference from right and wrong. Your average thief knows that stealing is wrong, but does it anyway.
But I'm sure you've heard psychologists speak of sociopaths or psychopaths as having no sense of right and wrong. This is baffling to me too, but perhaps they really don't know that raping and murdering a child is wrong.
Fortunately, since the majority of us do consider it wrong, we lock these people up in mental hospitals or prisons.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 7:58:37 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1666
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
So, that is why I ask, which premise or premises do you prefer?
I have multiple warring premises, and I aim for compromise among them all. I don't see that listing the premises would be helpful, since again I choose these premises through a subjective personal preference.
I don't think it's a wormhole to say that I prefer the morals I prefer. Why do I like the color purple better than orange, or Beethoven over Mozart? I just do.
But among my premises would be:
minimizing sadness/pain
maximizing happiness/pleasure
maximizing liberty/freedom
minimizing discrimination
maximizing equality
setting penalties that fit the crimes
ensuring the safety of the society
respecting personal property
recognizing that some fraction of personal property should be pooled in order to further the other goals and premises
So, what is going to be you defense when the revelution comes. When they come and round us all us.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 8:26:06 PM
|
|
|
MrFribbles
Posts: 1884
Joined: 1/29/2007
From: Hawaii, but I've moved around since then
Status: offline
|
quote:
And most criminals, I expect, know the difference from right and wrong.
Would it be fair to say you mean "Have their own set of moral standards, recognize them, and choose to break them anyway"?
_____________________________
You're a door without a key,
A field without a fence.
You've made a holy fool of me,
And I've thanked you ever since.
- Aaron Weiss
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/6/2008 8:42:40 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1666
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
quote:
And most criminals, I expect, know the difference from right and wrong.
Would it be fair to say you mean "Have their own set of moral standards, recognize them, and choose to break them anyway"?
I have known some of these people. They tend to be amoral or tend to be survivalists with situational ethics.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/7/2008 2:23:45 AM
|
|
|
abraxas
Posts: 333
Joined: 4/8/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
quote:
And most criminals, I expect, know the difference from right and wrong.
Would it be fair to say you mean "Have their own set of moral standards, recognize them, and choose to break them anyway"?
I have known some of these people. They tend to be amoral or tend to be survivalists with situational ethics.
Doesn't everyone have their own set of moral standards, recognize them, and (to varying degrees) choose to break them anyway?
If our penal system was based on the premise that an absolute moral standard exists (and on a second premise that the penal code accurately represents it), the easiest defence would be "prove it exists".
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/7/2008 8:53:51 AM
|
|
|
URForgiven
Posts: 1211
Joined: 3/22/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
Maybe this is the tyranny of the majority. So be it. We are stuck with that in a democracy. I am glad that many of the fundamental issues are ensconced in the Constitution, where they are hard to change (since it takes much more than a simple majority to do so).
"...endowed by our Creator"
These "certain inalienable rights" are not manmade nor do they originate in man.
Our God given rights form our foundation of which our laws are the guarantor. We are a nation of laws, and we are so because we are a nation founded upon an absolute morality that originates in, and proceeds from God.
Peace
_____________________________
"Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit,
are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?" Galatians 3:3
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/7/2008 11:46:37 AM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1021
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
quote:
And most criminals, I expect, know the difference from right and wrong.
Would it be fair to say you mean "Have their own set of moral standards, recognize them, and choose to break them anyway"?
Yes. Indeed you put it much better than I (lazily) did.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morality v Legality - 11/7/2008 12:00:57 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1021
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: URForgiven
quote:
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
Maybe this is the tyranny of the majority. So be it. We are stuck with that in a democracy. I am glad that many of the fundamental issues are ensconced in the Constitution, where they are hard to change (since it takes much more than a simple majority to do so).
"...endowed by our Creator"
These "certain inalienable rights" are not manmade nor do they originate in man.
Our God given rights form our foundation of which our laws are the guarantor. We are a nation of laws, and we are so because we are a nation founded upon an absolute morality that originates in, and proceeds from God.
Peace
Again, I deny that absolute "god given" rights exist.
But for the sake of argument, let's assume they do exist. That means that people in North Korea have the right to free speech and people in the UK have the right to bear arms. Of course, if they actually exercize these rights, they can get locked up.
I would much rather have my rights written down and guaranteed by the manmade laws of the land, than to have impotent metaphysical God-given rights.
I find it hard to imagine that God was interested enough to give us the right to not have troops quartered in our homes, or the right to not have excessive bail imposed. All of these things are manmade laws made by lawmakers. Certainly these lawmakers were and are influenced by their religious and moral sentiments.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
