The Reality Of Progressivism

[Diogenes]

As has been stated before, marriage has many legal implications. Not the least of which is property. And I am also atheist, so I would rather not have to submit church law either.

"The Constitution says that all men are created equal,

It also references that God you don't believe in. Why cite moral principles based on a philosophy you reject?

and it doesn't say that all men are created equal except for gays.

Do you know what zeit geist is? You are stumbling all over it.

Just like everyone else who is born in this country, gays are endowed by their creator, God, with inalienable rights, and among those are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. At birth, whether your are born in Russia, Cuba, South America, or New York, you are born equal. The difference is that our babies grow up to live free." -Barry Goldwater

I think for most of this nations existence, gays were regarded as non compos mentis by the benevolent authorities, and demonically possessed by the less benevolent authorities. It wasn't until 1973 that homosexuality was removed from the list of psychiatric disorders by the American Psychiatric Association. And then not because the Psychiatrists had changed their mind, but instead because a mob of violent threatening people showed up at their meeting demanding it.

You need to at least be aware of the ugly parts of the history of the groups you belong to. A thick skin is always an asset.

[MSimon]

And I would have thought you would take more kindly to a quote from your libertarian/conservative buddy Barry Goldwater.

I agree with Barry. But I'm also very influenced by my very gay friendly and knowledgeable coblogger Eric at Classical Values who is against gay marriage. Which is why I say I'm agnostic on the issue. I don't care if gays marry. But I'm not going to sing songs and carry signs. I care a lot more about gays in the military. If the best or second best military in the world (the Israeli Armed Forces) can handle gays in their military without significant problems I don't see why the US Armed Forces can't do the same.

In the past when it was more significant I have had a number of gays out themselves to me. So I'm not unsympathetic in general. I just have no dog in the marriage fight.

BTW Barry was wrong about the Drug War. I think his son is better on that issue. I do take various points of view in consideration. And then I make up my own mind.

[MSimon]

It also references that God you don't believe in. Why cite moral principles based on a philosophy you reject?

That is not exactly fair. Which God exactly was referenced? Christian? Islamic, Hindu, Zoroastrian? Or some other God or Gods?

But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. -Thomas Jefferson

The references to God are more of an appeal to nature than an appeal to a generic or specific deity.

[Diogenes]

It also references that God you don't believe in. Why cite moral principles based on a philosophy you reject?

That is not exactly fair. Which God exactly was referenced? Christian? Islamic, Hindu, Zoroastrian? Or some other God or Gods?

Two points.

1. To an agnostic, all gods are equally null.

2. It is the God of Abraham, Christ and Mohammad.

But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. -Thomas Jefferson

That was Jefferson's Opinion. While he was right about some things, he was wrong about others. One of his contemporaries replied to this: (and I forget which one. I can probably find it if necessary.)


"Were a man ever to persuade himself that there is no God, I fear he would not only pick my pocket but break not my leg but my neck! "

The references to God are more of an appeal to nature than an appeal to a generic or specific deity.

Jefferson was said to be a deist. Most of the States were various denominations of Christian. Jefferson often had to be careful that his deist nature didn't become widely known. Thomas Payne was ran off for expressing Deistic sentiments.

The task of writing the Declaration was given to Jefferson because he was considered to be a very good writer. As it was, some of the delegates were not happy with his original draft and made changes to it. As they had veto power over the wording, and as the vast bulk of them were representative of the states they were from, it's a pretty safe bet the God they were referring to wasn't metaphorical.


A couple of other fun facts, Jefferson was actually shorter than average fellow with an annoying high squeaky voice. He was not considered a good speaker, but was considered to be an excellent writer. He enjoyed diddling a slave girl who was the half sister (by her father) of his wife who died. The Slave girl was said to look nearly identical to his wife.

[Diogenes]

An example of what I referred to earlier.



Shocking Car Crash Footage Shows Father Taking Full Impact to Save Baby




http://www.asylum.com/2010/05/11/shocki ... act-to-sa/

[kcdodd]

MSimon

Are you married?

Diogenes

Most moral things people justify under religion or god can be justified many other ways. What the writers intended by god is irrelevant.

[MSimon]

God of Abraham, Christ and Mohammad.

Has any one checked to see if they are the same? I know that is the claim. Where is the proof?

And then there is the question of Passover. The Bible commands believers to celebrate it. I know a few Christians do. So how can the Jewish and Christian God be the same if so few follow the Jewish commands? Same for the Islamics. And why do so few Christians study Jewish common law?

[MSimon]

MSimon

Are you married?

Yeah. My mate insisted. I held off as long as I could. She was 8 1/2 months pregnant. Is the guy you want to marry pregnant?

[MSimon]

A couple of other fun facts, Jefferson was actually shorter than average fellow with an annoying high squeaky voice. He was not considered a good speaker, but was considered to be an excellent writer. He enjoyed diddling a slave girl who was the half sister (by her father) of his wife who died. The Slave girl was said to look nearly identical to his wife.

Ah. So he was into D&S with blood relations. Kinky.

[MSimon]

A thick skin is always an asset.

Yep. A very valuable asset.

[MSimon]

A very nice article on the subject of gay marriage by my coblogger.

http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives ... _of_1.html

[kcdodd]

MSimon

Are you married?

Yeah. My mate insisted. I held off as long as I could. She was 8 1/2 months pregnant. Is the guy you want to marry pregnant?

Not yet.

[MSimon]

I think that it is impossible to separate legality and morality.

You keep saying that. I don't see it.

Tobacco smoking is a vice. Which means there are moral problems. Is it a crime? Not yet.

Staying drunk all the time in your home is a vice. Is it a crime? Not yet.

Crimes are easy to police: victims and perpetrators are different entities. You have witnesses and victims. And you know: the victims go to the police.

Vices are much more difficult (and usually policing them is ineffective) because the victim and perpetrator are one. And in America at least the victim can't be forced to testify against the perpetrator. You have the right to remain silent.

We have mens rea for malum in se crimes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_in_se

For malum prohibitum crimes mens rea is more difficult.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_prohibitum

"Public welfare offenses" are a subset of malum prohibitum offenses as they are typically regulatory in nature and often "'result in no direct or immediate injury to person or property but merely create the danger or probability of it which the law seeks to minimize.'" Bash, 130 Wn.2d at 607 (quoting Morissette v. United States, 342 U.S. 246, 255-56, 72 S. Ct. 240, 96 L. Ed. 288 (1952)); see also State v. Carty, 27 Wn. App. 715, 717, 620 P.2d 137 (1980).

Some examples of mala prohibita include parking violations, copyright violations, tax laws, cultural taboos, and doing certain things without a license.

[MSimon]

And of course mens rea is critical in separating torts from crimes.

i.e. carelessness vs bad intent.

[Diogenes]

MSimon

Are you married?

Diogenes

Most moral things people justify under religion or god can be justified many other ways.

I agree, and I assert that the other ways are actually superior explanations than is religion. However, how do you educate a child from knowing nothing at all, to a full fledged adult capable of understanding the "other ways" without using some crutch in the middle?

Religion is the Answer. It asserts unknowable powers, and it works on people not wanting to test them. (the vast majority) It's just like Santa Clause, except it works on adults.

I assert it is a necessary crutch, because it is impossible to enlighten people quickly enough any other way. For most people, a morality not based on Religion simply cannot exist.

What the writers intended by god is irrelevant.

Of course it's irrelevant! That's why they put it in there, they wanted to make sure everyone knew that it was irrelevant!

Seriously?

The Entire moral system of that Era was based on the belief in God. It was the foundation pin of the whole body of thought regarding freedom, and rights. I've been warning people for years, pull out that pin at your own peril.