Ponder moral legislation

There’s so much talk these days about all kinds of social issues and how to approach them as far as the rule of law is concerned. We tend to ask ourselves if we support this idea morally, and base our decisions and opinions on that mentality.

However, I don’t think we’re asking ourselves the right question. We have to be careful how we marry religious morality with law and order. First off, there are plenty of things that are legal that aren’t necessarily considered moral. The real question we should be asking ourselves is: How much do we want to police morality, and where do we draw the line?

The gay marriage debate comes to mind right away. Those who oppose it do so based on moral convictions, but should that be reason enough to outlaw something? It’s a question I think we should all ask ourselves.

Religious ideas of morality shouldn’t necessarily be a factor when it comes to making laws. If you disagree with that, then I ask: Why not try and outlaw everything that may be considered biblically immoral? Why not create an entirely ecclesiastical government?

Thomas Jefferson once said, “(I)t does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are 20 gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.” This basically means to live and let live. It seems to me that most people who advocate moral legislation only want to focus on certain immoralities, and I find that to be an inconsistent philosophy.



Sun, 12/17/2017 - 19:29

‘I bring you good tidings’

Sun, 12/17/2017 - 19:29

Olmstead needs team

Sun, 12/17/2017 - 19:26

All the ‘new’ that’s fit to print

Sat, 12/16/2017 - 20:26

Rick McKee Editorial Cartoon