And If Elected, I'll Put God In Every Home...

[Clint]

Originally Posted by A Karenina

?? WIth all due respect, I'd prefer a government that gives me room to live according to what I decide is good. I don't care what the goverment believes, but I do want the freedom of choice.

Would you say the same if the majority weren't Christians? What if you belonged to a minority religion, or to no religion at all? It's not just talk. And it really doesn't matter if the proponents of the separation between church and state only believe in purple pigs...my feeble attempt at saying this lightly.

What matters is the principle. Does government have the right to impose moral values on its citizens?

There must be a smiley that has its tongue in its cheek. It should have been with my first paragraph. Beyond that, I’m just being pragmatic about it. If the majority believed in purple pigs (good one) you can bet they would want their piggish eating habits to be the norm. The beliefs of the majority find their way into government. Government reflects the values of the majority and those values come from the morals of the majority.

I have to say that government does have the right to impose the morals of the majority. It actually has the obligation. If the majority believes pink pigs shouldn’t fly because looking at the bottom side of a flying pig is immoral, then pink pigs should be grounded.

Should we permit polygamy? It is clearly a reflection of a moral value rooted in the majority religion.

One community or State will outlaw shops that sell pornography and another allows it. It is a reflection of the prevailing morals of the community. Those morals almost without exception reflect those of the majority religion in that community.

I have traveled to other countries where the majority religion wasn’t Christian. I respected their laws knowing that they were rooted in their religious beliefs. If I was the minority here (I mean this) and I was bothered as much as some seem to be bothered, I would move to where my moral values were reflected in the laws.

One of the great things about America is that we try not to oppress those who’s beliefs are different from the majority. We also have a system that will adapt if the minority manages to convince the majority to adopt their views, making them the majority. The way you do that is to change the heart of the majority… not by forcing the will of the minority on the majority.

[BabyRider]

Originally Posted by Clint

I have to say that government does have the right to impose the morals of the majority. It actually has the obligation. If the majority believes pink pigs shouldn’t fly because looking at the bottom side of a flying pig is immoral, then pink pigs should be grounded.

Ooo. This is touchy ground. I don't normally get involved in discussions like this, but I like to read them, in hopes of learning. This caught my attention.
How could the government impose morality? I'm thinking of past politicians, and wondering how, with the total lack of morals I've seen, they could possibly hope to accomplish this. This is a recipe for disaster. Our morals based on what lying, and occassionally corrupt people believe to be moral? It's absolutely laughable. I believe the obligation is to BE moral, not impose morality, and unfortunately, a lot of politicians fall WAY short of the mark.

[Clint]

Originally Posted by BabyRider

Ooo. This is touchy ground. I don't normally get involved in discussions like this, but I like to read them, in hopes of learning. This caught my attention.
How could the government impose morality? I'm thinking of past politicians, and wondering how, with the total lack of morals I've seen, they could possibly hope to accomplish this. This is a recipe for disaster. Our morals based on what lying, and occassionally corrupt people believe to be moral? It's absolutely laughable. I believe the obligation is to BE moral, not impose morality, and unfortunately, a lot of politicians fall WAY short of the mark.

One of the realities of our form of government is that our elected officials are a reflection of the majority. IF they are corrupt and continue to be corrupt, we have a corrupt society.
I agree that we have the obligation to be moral. If we are, then our government will also be moral.

[Lon]

Originally Posted by Clint

There must be a smiley that has its tongue in its cheek. It should have been with my first paragraph. Beyond that, I’m just being pragmatic about it. If the majority believed in purple pigs (good one) you can bet they would want their piggish eating habits to be the norm. The beliefs of the majority find their way into government. Government reflects the values of the majority and those values come from the morals of the majority.

I have to say that government does have the right to impose the morals of the majority. It actually has the obligation. If the majority believes pink pigs shouldn’t fly because looking at the bottom side of a flying pig is immoral, then pink pigs should be grounded.

Should we permit polygamy? It is clearly a reflection of a moral value rooted in the majority religion.

One community or State will outlaw shops that sell pornography and another allows it. It is a reflection of the prevailing morals of the community. Those morals almost without exception reflect those of the majority religion in that community.

I have traveled to other countries where the majority religion wasn’t Christian. I respected their laws knowing that they were rooted in their religious beliefs. If I was the minority here (I mean this) and I was bothered as much as some seem to be bothered, I would move to where my moral values were reflected in the laws.

One of the great things about America is that we try not to oppress those who’s beliefs are different from the majority. We also have a system that will adapt if the minority manages to convince the majority to adopt their views, making them the majority. The way you do that is to change the heart of the majority… not by forcing the will of the minority on the majority.

Good post Clint. What if majority thinking and values are in conflict with existing Constitutional Laws?

[Clint]

Originally Posted by Lon

Good post Clint. What if majority thinking and values are in conflict with existing Constitutional Laws?

Good question Lon. I think that when it comes to the framework of a country we have to honor it and recon to it as long as we can. If there is enough pressure by the majority of the citizens to change it then it must be changed.

If you are referring to the “separation of Church and State” issue, I don’t think the Constitution supports the minority uproar. We have freedom of religion…not freedom from it. There are always two directions to take the extreme. Right now the extreme being pushed is one that says the Constitution excludes religion from policy discussion. It could also be argued that religion belongs right in the center of the discussion. After all, the Constitution prohibits government from interfering with religion… it’s not the other way around