 |
|
RE: Limited government... but which laws?
Posted on: October 13, 2017 at 14:03:57 CT
JeffB MU
Posts:
73715
Member For:
21.78 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
2
TigerMatt: I believe there should be government. Yes it should have laws that get enforced. I am for limited government.
So we have at least that common ground.
TigerMatt: You say that but then you support growth
I disagree with your assertion that I am in favor of the growth of government, especially at the national level. I am guessing that the size of the federal government should be reduced by about half... perhaps more... possibly much more.
TigerMatt: and enforcement of government to espouse your views.
I think we have a lot of common ground with regards to the general principles involved in government enforcing laws, our disagreement would come with respect to what those laws should be. We would probably agree on things like murder, robbery, assault, rape and so on, but might disagree on some others based at least partially on our moral values and world view. For instance, you are in favor of a right to abortion, and might therefore believe that Roe v Wade was a good use of federal power to enforce your view on those in states that thought preventing the deliberate, often brutal slaughter of innocent human beings was a valid exercise in government power.
There are undoubtedly a number of places where our values and beliefs would diverge to the point that we would espouse different laws or penalties, but my point here is a more general one... namely, that we both would want government to make and enforce laws. You seem to imply... or state outright, that I am in favor of using state power to force people to do things or not do things based upon my beliefs... while I submit that everyone who is in favor of governments with laws and a means of enforcing those laws does the same thing. The only difference is what those beliefs might be.
TigerMatt: There is no question of truth in regards to government and political theory. You are fully entitled to your truth as much as I am fully entitled to my truth.
This is one place where our beliefs diverge. People are entitled to their own opinions, but not entitled to their own "truths". The communists' "truth" would include "the ends justify the means" as a part of their moral code, and would apply that such that a violent revolution is justified in order to bring about what they envision to be a far better society. I cry foul on that one.
Closer to home, you are of the opinion that unborn babies are not human beings, but I cry foul on that one as well. The scientific facts say otherwise... and our laws should reflect the reality... the truth... rather than false opinions.
TigerMatt: The many truths of society should be able to coexist with each other through voluntary relationships and respect of private property.
There are many beliefs that are compatible with others, but that is not always,/i> the case. Take for instance the beliefs of many Muslims that "infidels" should be subjugated, and either made to convert, pay a special tax to them or die. I don't think that belief is compatible with those of most Americans. Ditto for the belief that someone who draws a picture of Muhammad has committed blasphemy and that it is their duty to kill them for it... among MANY other beliefs enshrined in Sharia Law that are completely incompatible with the prototypical Judeo Christian beliefs that undergird the laws and moral values most western societies, despite the generalized move away from those Judeo-Christian principles over the last several decades.
So we have at least that common ground.
TigerMatt: You say that but then you support growth
I disagree with your assertion that I am in favor of the growth of government, especially at the national level. I am guessing that the size of the federal government should be reduced by about half... perhaps more... possibly much more.
TigerMatt: and enforcement of government to espouse your views.
I think we have a lot of common ground with regards to the general principles involved in government enforcing laws, our disagreement would come with respect to what those laws should be. We would probably agree on things like murder, robbery, assault, rape and so on, but might disagree on some others based at least partially on our moral values and world view. For instance, you are in favor of a right to abortion, and might therefore believe that Roe v Wade was a good use of federal power to enforce your view on those in states that thought preventing the deliberate, often brutal slaughter of innocent human beings was a valid exercise in government power.
There are undoubtedly a number of places where our values and beliefs would diverge to the point that we would espouse different laws or penalties, but my point here is a more general one... namely, that we both would want government to make and enforce laws. You seem to imply... or state outright, that I am in favor of using state power to force people to do things or not do things based upon my beliefs... while I submit that everyone who is in favor of governments with laws and a means of enforcing those laws does the same thing. The only difference is what those beliefs might be.
TigerMatt: There is no question of truth in regards to government and political theory. You are fully entitled to your truth as much as I am fully entitled to my truth.
This is one place where our beliefs diverge. People are entitled to their own opinions, but not entitled to their own "truths". The communists' "truth" would include "the ends justify the means" as a part of their moral code, and would apply that such that a violent revolution is justified in order to bring about what they envision to be a far better society. I cry foul on that one.
Closer to home, you are of the opinion that unborn babies are not human beings, but I cry foul on that one as well. The scientific facts say otherwise... and our laws should reflect the reality... the truth... rather than false opinions.
TigerMatt: The many truths of society should be able to coexist with each other through voluntary relationships and respect of private property.
There are many beliefs that are compatible with others, but that is not always,/i> the case. Take for instance the beliefs of many Muslims that "infidels" should be subjugated, and either made to convert, pay a special tax to them or die. I don't think that belief is compatible with those of most Americans. Ditto for the belief that someone who draws a picture of Muhammad has committed blasphemy and that it is their duty to kill them for it... among MANY other beliefs enshrined in Sharia Law that are completely incompatible with the prototypical Judeo Christian beliefs that undergird the laws and moral values most western societies, despite the generalized move away from those Judeo-Christian principles over the last several decades.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
RE: Limited government... but which laws? - JeffB MU - 10/13 14:03:57