Go Back   Great Debate Forum > Political, Social Issues, Society > Philosophy

Philosophy investigation of truths, knowledge and concerns of existence

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-27-2008, 01:11 PM
capitalist dog's Avatar
capitalist dog capitalist dog is offline
What Would Mises Do?
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 2,852
Blog Entries: 11
Reputation: 209
capitalist dog has a spectacular aura aboutcapitalist dog has a spectacular aura aboutcapitalist dog has a spectacular aura about
Default legislation of morality

I have heard it said that you can't legislate morality. If not, what pray tell can be legislated?
Reply With Quote
Sponsor
  #2  
Old 12-01-2008, 02:56 PM
Captain Groove's Avatar
Captain Groove Captain Groove is offline
Great Debater
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 64
Reputation: 31
Captain Groove is on a distinguished road of debating
Default

It ironic that those who are most likely oppose legislation of morality are often likely to support legitimization of immorality (such as confiscating the resoures of an unfavored group to distribute those resources to a favored one).
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-01-2008, 03:28 PM
capitalist dog's Avatar
capitalist dog capitalist dog is offline
What Would Mises Do?
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 2,852
Blog Entries: 11
Reputation: 209
capitalist dog has a spectacular aura aboutcapitalist dog has a spectacular aura aboutcapitalist dog has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Groove View Post
It ironic that those who are most likely oppose legislation of morality are often likely to support legitimization of immorality (such as confiscating the resoures of an unfavored group to distribute those resources to a favored one).
It is also ironic that those same individuals will justify such confiscation on moral grounds.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-13-2009, 06:48 PM
asteroid777 asteroid777 is offline
Jr. Great Debater
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Washington
Posts: 15
Reputation: 13
asteroid777 is on a distinguished road of debating
Default

anyone who will confiscate your enemy's property will then be willing to come after your's: taxes are a form of theft - by legal means the Government robs your every paycheck.
since in the Constitution taxes were supposed to be "temporary and voluntary" and we all know that taxes are neither of those things in the real world.
Tax is just confiscation by other means.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-14-2009, 03:20 AM
capitalist dog's Avatar
capitalist dog capitalist dog is offline
What Would Mises Do?
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 2,852
Blog Entries: 11
Reputation: 209
capitalist dog has a spectacular aura aboutcapitalist dog has a spectacular aura aboutcapitalist dog has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asteroid777 View Post
...taxes were supposed to be "temporary and voluntary" and we all know that taxes are neither of those things in the real world.
The problem with government temporary solutions is they tend to become permanent problems.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-09-2010, 06:01 PM
Hub City Progressive's Avatar
Hub City Progressive Hub City Progressive is offline
Jr. Great Debater
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 18
Blog Entries: 2
Reputation: 26
Hub City Progressive is on a distinguished road of debating
Default

I think there is a distinct difference between legislating human behavior and legislating consequences. For example, drinking alcohol is a human behavior. It should be left alone. That is why prohibition did not work. However, if this same person engages in a behavior that affects others, then it becomes something different. To drive drunk, and take someone's life in the process, is to infringe on their liberty to live. There should be consequences, and they should be severe.

This can be applied to many things. Do not concentrate on the behavior, but on the consequences. Take this whole airport mess because of the "War on Terror." Why are we inconveniencing everyone? Frisking little old ladies? Come on! It is ridiculous. I would profile anyone with a link to a jihadist government or organization in the Middle East. The intelligence is there. Same with those who have links to hate groups here in America. Does not matter! Problem is we have become way too PC. We can't even look out for our own enemies anymore because we might offend somebody. Good grief!

Muslim foreigners? Definitely.
Muslim Americans? At least keep an eye on.
KKK? Definitely.
Tea Baggers? Yes.
Tea Baggers or KKK that happen to be veterans? Definitely.
Tea Baggers with psychological history? Definitely.

This is very simple, and we can stop punishing everybody else for a few loose cannons.

I also support the 2nd Amendment everywhere. Let people carry firearms, and there won't be anymore death tolls at college campuses, office complexes, or airports.

But what do I know?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-10-2010, 05:29 AM
hugo's Avatar
hugo hugo is offline
End the Welfare State
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 366
Reputation: 186
hugo has a spectacular aura abouthugo has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hub City Progressive View Post
Tea Baggers? Yes.
Tea Baggers or KKK that happen to be veterans? Definitely.
Tea Baggers with psychological history? Definitely.
From the urban dictionary:

1. A sex act.

2. A phrase Fox News picked to promote a series of "Boston Tea Party" reenactment protests against the Obama administration on Tax Freedom Day, apparently unaware of the meaning of the phrase (see above.)
Fox news watcher: are you going to the tea bagger party?

Me: what are you, some kinda perv?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-14-2010, 07:15 AM
TwilightTraveler TwilightTraveler is offline
Great Debater
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 45
Reputation: 32
TwilightTraveler is on a distinguished road of debating
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by capitalist dog View Post
I have heard it said that you can't legislate morality. If not, what pray tell can be legislated?
The obvious answer is "Yes, we've (society) been doing it for centuries." The more interesting phrasing is "In American society, which advocates personal freedom, should we attempt to legislate morality? Which personal freedoms should be limited, and why?"
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-14-2010, 08:45 AM
hugo's Avatar
hugo hugo is offline
End the Welfare State
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 366
Reputation: 186
hugo has a spectacular aura abouthugo has a spectacular aura about
Default

Thou shall not kill is a moral position.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-14-2010, 03:14 PM
TwilightTraveler TwilightTraveler is offline
Great Debater
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 45
Reputation: 32
TwilightTraveler is on a distinguished road of debating
Default

Very true sir. Just not sure where you are going with it. Can you add an explanation?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lets Debate Utilitarianism and Morality tollcriticalthinker Philosophy 9 01-11-2010 02:40 AM


All times are GMT -9. The time now is 04:34 PM.

Design By: MinerSkinz.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2010 GreatDebateForum.com All rights reserved.