Legislating Morality

[Stoner Shadow Wolf]

no need to pick morality apart. just BE. stop wasting time and thought power on the needless inconsistancies of life, such as weather this is right or wrong, or weather it is moral or amoral, or weather any (right, wrong, morality, justice) are even real.



Just be as you need to be. Just do as you need to do.

[Hollywierdtoker]

Apparently this is a hot topic recently:jointsmile: This is on MSN dot calm today. :rasta:

Is Morality Natural? | Newsweek Health for Life | Newsweek.com

Thats kind of funny. I was thinking about what humans would be like without morals. More animalistic and less...whatever we are. I think it may be the upcoming election that sparked this interest in me for the moment. Many people still have strong animal instinct...such as trying to be the dominant animal maybe? To have control...power.

[delusionsofNORMALity]

the first thing you'd better realize is that none of these folks see it as legislating morality. they see it as policing the way you interact with others in society and they've been doing it since the beginning of civilization. the simple fact is that everything you do involves moral guidelines, so how could the law avoid sticking its greasy fingers into the pie as well. from deciding whether or not to kill that bastard who stopped in front of you at a yellow light to choosing between the hamburger and the vegetable plate for lunch, your morality is entwined in your every move.

i'm sure we all agree that there must be some sort of code of conduct when dealing with others. the sticking point is where to draw the line between personal and interpersonal actions. where one might see gay marriage as no one's business but the two people involved, another might see it as degrading a beloved institution for the entire society. where i find no harm in rolling up a nice fat joint and settling in for the evening, some see such actions as encouraging the abuse of a hazardous substance and setting a dangerous example for the nation's youth. in both cases there is some merit to both positions (i must admit i see logic on only one side of both examples, but that is my own bias) and legislation is the only way to decide the argument civilly.

the reasoning behind it all is less one of morality than it is of power. mankind is a creature of hunting packs and grazing herds (depending on individual temperament). within those societies there will be leaders and followers and the power lies with those who can bend the others to their will. determining why decisions will be made (morality) provides more power than merely making the decisions alone. once the bureaucratic nightmare of intrusive government was developed, laws took the place of brute force, but the concept is still the same.

usually conservative morals

maybe it's your outlook or the way you were raised that blinds you to the massive intrusions of liberal morality. what could have more to do with morality than forcing the accepted guidelines of religion from the public square? as an atheist i can understand the push to keep religion from being forced down our throats at every turn, but to banish it completely seems a bit much. next we should look at the fervor with which they attempt to keep everyone from being offended. where morality and common decency should be enough to chasten the intolerant in society, they demand laws with special penalties should certain terms be used and even attempt to determine the mindset of the accused so that special punishments can be enforced. finally; we should think long and hard about the wealth redistribution so beloved of the socialistic liberals and see it for what it really is, enforced charity. charity, the act of giving without the slightest thought to recompense. surely the domain of morality and here they are trying to legislate us into a charitable mood.

the desire to grasp the power of determining why decisions are made is the sin of all our leaders.

[TurnyBright]

There are laws that exist nowadays that prohibit activities that cause damage to other people. Any law that is not in that vein, like drug laws or nudity laws or divorce laws or tax laws or zoning laws, exist purely as a result of the economic model upon which the [United States] economy rides.

So basically all the laws that impinge upon the private moral authority of each individual are reasoned on the skewed math that retards the flow of money in the US. Do you expect that to have a smooth end?

[Stoner Shadow Wolf]

There are laws that exist nowadays that prohibit activities that cause damage to other people. Any law that is not in that vein, like drug laws or nudity laws or divorce laws or tax laws or zoning laws, exist purely as a result of the economic model upon which the [United States] economy rides.

So basically all the laws that impinge upon the private moral authority of each individual are reasoned on the skewed math that retards the flow of money in the US. Do you expect that to have a smooth end?

No, actually, i expect either A: it comes smashing down on us all swiftly, or B: we destroy the fuck out of it before it kills us.


What we're going with, however, is C: sit around like retards, picking our noses, asses, and other various bodily cavities expecting someone else to work things out for us.



There is no god willing to intervene with our free will fuckers! stand up and rock out for crying out loud!


Three shits to the wind everyone.



aieee, how cant you see that we are responsible for our own world of creation?! we ARE our creators!

FFS!!!




P.S. this isnt directed at anyone in particular, im jsut ranting the fuck out cuz no one listens :rastasmoke: yeah im cool like that.

[Stoner Shadow Wolf]

:sorry1:
:bump2:
:stupid: