Legislating morality

[SimplyMe]

God can will something and it not occur? Is there a difference between willing something and determining something will happen?

Yes, I would say there is:

will1 (wĭl)

n.

1. 1. The mental faculty by which one deliberately chooses or decides upon a course of action: championed freedom of will against a doctrine of predetermination.
   2. The act of exercising the will.
2. 1. Diligent purposefulness; determination: an athlete with the will to win.
   2. Self-control; self-discipline: lacked the will to overcome the addiction.
3. A desire, purpose, or determination, especially of one in authority: It is the sovereign's will that the prisoner be spared.
4. Deliberate intention or wish: Let it be known that I took this course of action against my will.
5. Free discretion; inclination or pleasure: wandered about, guided only by will.
6. Bearing or attitude toward others; disposition: full of good will.
7. 1. A legal declaration of how a person wishes his or her possessions to be disposed of after death.
   2. A legally executed document containing this declaration.

v., willed, will·ing, wills.

v.tr.

1. To decide on; choose.
2. To yearn for; desire: “She makes you will your own destruction” (George Bernard Shaw).
3. To decree, dictate, or order.
4. To resolve with a forceful will; determine.
5. To induce or try to induce by sheer force of will: We willed the sun to come out.
6. To grant in a legal will; bequeath.

v.intr.

1. To exercise the will.
2. To make a choice; choose.

idiom:

at will

1. Just as or when one wishes.

[Middle English, from Old English willa.]

As a parent, I can will that my children obey me. Since my children make many of their own choices, they sometimes do and sometimes do not follow my will for them. Now, if I determine that they shall follow my will, I can force them to follow it. I can't claim that I would be successful, then again I don't have God's power.

As for tariffs, we will likely have to agree to disagree. I admit there are tariffs that have been used for moral purposes, my study of history would indicate most are not. Besides, why is it moral to improve yourself by hurting your neighbor? I would submit that if you looked at the various economic laws that have been passed in this country you would find many that are not moral and some that are not even ethical.

Another example I thought of previously were the number of pork-barrel laws that are passed. True, they are often piggybacked on laws that have to do with morality, but they themselves are typically neither moral nor based on morality.

 

[Leanna]

If you prevent someone from sinning by passing a law, are you not removing that person's free will to commit that sin? Or at least impairing it?

Some people, such as the dominionists, want to set up an actual theocracy. Wouldn't that remove free will entirely?

Would not god be angry that you are interfering with his plans for mankind?


edit: some people are apparently consfused about the term "legislating morality". This does not just mean creating laws based on morality. All laws that govern human behavior are based on morality.

This is a negative term that means legislating a particular moral code (the bible) on everyone, when not everyone accepts its validity.

Yes I support legislating morality, within reason, because without doing so society would just become a mess! I wish I could remember where I was reading this.... maybe I will later... an anthropologist studying civilizations concluded that essentially all civilizations rise and fall the same way. Built on a moral code and under that foundation they grow strong and expound into the arts, science, math and new discoveries.... then the moral code weakens and more things are "okay".... the fall of the civilization comes soon after. I do believe even the Roman civilization went under this way in part, not to mention the fact that all roads led to Rome. They were way more advanced than we knew... they even had brain surgeons!!!

 

[Electric Skeptic]

Speeding is immoral because it puts you and others at higher risk for accidents, and death. Itis also immoral because it wastes more gas (cars are less efficient at 65 than at 55mph.) Being harmful to society is a good definition of immoral.

No, it would be a lousy definition of immoral. There are a great number of activities that I find immoral that don't harm society.

 

[KCDAD]

No, it would be a lousy definition of immoral. There are a great number of activities that I find immoral that don't harm society.

Ok, let's hear your immoral activities that don't harm society.

 

[faster_jackrabbit]

I hope I didn't imply morality comes from God, (I might have) I intended to present that morality comes from our notions of God, or divine judgement...

To me it's the same thing, since I do not believe god actually exists.

That's why I object to the idea that the morality preached in the bible has any more weight than the morality that comes from other sources.

 

[gengwall]

Ok, let's hear your immoral activities that don't harm society.

The real question isn't which immoral activities don't harm society (although given time I'm sure we can come up with some). The question is, is the harm to society compelling enough that the right to liberty, property, or life of the doer of that activity can be suppressed. In that context (which is the correct constitutional one), I could make quite a long list of activities that, although immoral, should not banned (or even addressed) in the law.

 

[faster_jackrabbit]

There wasn't the leadership to force the issue... it had been brewing since before the Revolution. The founding convention compromised for the sake of independence with the full intention of seeing the issue faced later.

That was quite a compromise, since "later" was like eighty-five years later.

 

[faster_jackrabbit]

Ok, let's hear your immoral activities that don't harm society.

Having a beer on my couch.

Watching a porn DVD on my couch.

Having a call girl come to my house.

 

[faster_jackrabbit]

Speeding is immoral because it puts you and others at higher risk for accidents, and death. Itis also immoral because it wastes more gas (cars are less efficient at 65 than at 55mph.) Being harmful to society is a good definition of immoral.

I didn't see this one earlier.

Speeding by itself doesn't cause accidents, intermixing fast and slow drivers does. This is the reason why staying in the left lane when you are not passing is also illegal in many states.

Regarding wasted gas, if that is a moral issue that should be legislated, then SUVs should be illegal and driving a hummer should be a capital offence.

I'd be willing to bet that my mustang uses less gas at 82 than a SUV at 70.

 

[""]

Watching a porn DVD on my couch.

You must have one of those special kind of couches that takes dvd's then huh?

 

[KCDAD]

Having a beer on my couch.

Watching a porn DVD on my couch.

Having a call girl come to my house.

What is immoral about these things? Be careful how you answer because you will tip off the damage to society in your answer.

 

[SimplyMe]

I didn't see this one earlier.

Speeding by itself doesn't cause accidents, intermixing fast and slow drivers does. This is the reason why staying in the left lane when you are not passing is also illegal in many states.

Regarding wasted gas, if that is a moral issue that should be legislated, then SUVs should be illegal and driving a hummer should be a capital offence.

I'd be willing to bet that my mustang uses less gas at 82 than a SUV at 70.

Driving in Germany opened my eyes as far as lane usage, in Germany you quickly learned to stay in the right lane unless passing. It was amazing how you could look behind you and not see a car in sight, then pull into the left lane and have a car behind you flashing it's headlights for you to get out of the way (I wasn't going slow, probably about 120-140Kph/70-85mph). Since coming back to the states, improper lane usage drives me nuts. It's often impolite, it impedes traffic flow, and -- as you point out -- it an be dangerous.

From complaints I've heard, it would sound like an H2 uses more gas idling than most cars at any speed.

 

[KCDAD]

I didn't see this one earlier.

Speeding by itself doesn't cause accidents, intermixing fast and slow drivers does. This is the reason why staying in the left lane when you are not passing is also illegal in many states. It is immoral to force other people to wait behind you because you are not in a hurry.

Regarding wasted gas, if that is a moral issue that should be legislated, then SUVs should be illegal and driving a hummer should be a capital offence.

I'd be willing to bet that my mustang uses less gas at 82 than a SUV at 70.

Bad rationalizations... speed does kill. Slow drivers do not cause accidents. Fast drivers do when they interact with the slow ones. Suv's should be illegal but instead they have taxes added onto them in the extra fuel they burn. Depending on the Mustang, you might lose that bet.

 

[faster_jackrabbit]

What is immoral about these things? Be careful how you answer because you will tip off the damage to society in your answer.

Nothing is immoral about these things. Other people claim there is something immoral about them. Which is the whole point of the thread.

Since it's your gag, you tell me how they hurt society. You are the one who thinks they do.

And please specify how often the harm occurs.

Is it harm that occurs every time the act is performed, such as murder, rape, assault, lying, cheating, adultery, or fraud?

Or is it a potential harm that occurs only occasionally, often in conjunction with irrational behavior, and most of the time the behavior does not cause harm?

This is the difference between the two categories of morality we are talking about.

 

[faster_jackrabbit]

Depending on the Mustang, you might lose that bet.

Not likely. 6 cylinders.

 

[KCDAD]

Nothing is immoral about these things. Other people claim there is something immoral about them. Which is the whole point of the thread.

Garsh, I guess you sure got me!

You said you had a list of immoral things and then oops, they're not immoral... yup. Shucks... I jest cain't keep up with your inteelect.

Having a beer on my couch.

Watching a porn DVD on my couch.

Having a call girl come to my house.
None of these things will get you arrested or shamed in the newspapers... or will they? And if so why?

 

[faster_jackrabbit]

Having a beer on my couch.

Watching a porn DVD on my couch.

Having a call girl come to my house.

Nothing is immoral about these things. Other people claim there is something immoral about them. Which is the whole point of the thread.

Since it's your gag, you tell me how they hurt society. You are the one who thinks they do.

Garsh, I guess you sure got me!

You said you had a list of immoral things and then oops, they're not immoral... yup. Shucks... I jest cain't keep up with your inteelect.

Nyuk, nyuk, hey Moe!

Didn't answer the question, though, did you? Quit giggling and tell me: how do those actions harm society?

None of these things will get you arrested or shamed in the newspapers... or will they? And if so why?

You know, that is the point of the thread. There is no reason why they should, other than a bunch of guys wrote a book back in the bronze age, but the last one will.

You tell me why. How does something I do in my own house with a willing participant harm society? What reason do you have to prohibit the call girl other than some book said so? What real reason do you have?

 

[Electric Skeptic]

Ok, let's hear your immoral activities that don't harm society.

I can give you a list of activities that I believe to be immoral which either do not harm society or do not harm society sufficiently to warrant making them illegal:

- cheating on a partner
- religious prosletyzing (particularly to children)
- creationism (although this falls into the one above)
- astrologers, soothsayers, 'psychics', etc.,
- hunting for sport
- racism/sexism/homophobia
etc., etc.

Oh, and no, speeding isn't immoral. It's prohibited because it's dangerous to society. But there's nothing immoral about my driving a car fast. There MIGHT be something immoral about my doing so where other people might be injured, but the law doesn't make that distinction. For example, there's nothing at all immoral about me driving my car at 100 mph on, say, the Nullabor plain, when there's nobody within ten miles. It's not speeding that's immoral, it's endangering others by doing so.

 

[KCDAD]

- cheating on a partner are you talking about sexual infidelity? it is illegal in the sense that you can be liable for money damages such as palimony or other support payments should your partner decide to sue violates personal worth and value of the indivdual
- religious prosletyzing (particularly to children)depends upon whether itis allowed by the parents (as in sunday school) but neverthe less in the worst case, protective orders can be issued and restraint orders. violates privacy and parental rights
- creationism (although this falls into the one above) immoral... not hardly... violates reason
- astrologers, soothsayers, 'psychics', etc., there is a fraud statute in place to prevent "fakers" from ripping off unsuspecting patrons, but in general this is a caveat emptor issue. Besides, society loves the entertainment... like pro wrestling. violates trust and honesty
- hunting for sport that's why you have groups like the Sierra Club, Ducks Unlimited and other groups supervising... licenses are required, tags and stamps I don't know... maybe violation of responsibility as paragon of animals and stewardship of the planet???
- racism/sexism/homophobia Civil rights laws in theory protect everyone from discrimination violation of personal liberty, dignity, self worth, equality
etc., etc.

Oh, and no, speeding isn't immoral. It's prohibited because it's dangerous to society. But there's nothing immoral about my driving a car fast. Except the wasting of fuel and self endangerment... Insurance companies are at risk here. Again the stewardship issue, and personal responsibility

In general these things do not specifically endanger society yet society has seen fit to protect us and itself from these activities. Apparently there is some harm to the relationship among members of society, the violation of norms and values that society uses to hold itself together perhaps.
Is your point that these specific things are legal but are immoral, or that they are immoral and don't hurt society?
I listed particular values that society seem to find important that these things violate... so in this sense they hurt society.

 

[Leanna]

Having a beer on my couch.

Watching a porn DVD on my couch.

Having a call girl come to my house.

Having a beer on a couch is an immoral activity? You must have been raised Baptist or something....

The other two do no damage to society? You are forgetting that real people make those porn DVDs and real people are call girls ---you are forgetting the damage it does to the women and men involved in that industry. If you doubt me, go over to the forum here for people recovering from that industry. Supporting that in any way is completely immoral and disgusting, Christian or not.