Thread: Freedom of choice and the Law

Originally Posted by Stigmata

Freedom: seems to me if you're not free to make a mistake or do something stupid, then you're not really free, are you? But human behaviour can be, and often is, abhorrent...and laws seems to be needed to curb behaviour and effectively limit choices.

Take my recent experience with jury duty:
This guy was free to rob a store and threaten the clerk's life. Nobody made him do it -- he made the choice to do it. He wasn't even smart enough to bring a weapon with him, but used a pair of scissors laying on the counter. He was entitled to legal representation, for free, since he can't afford a lawyer.

As a jury, we felt obligated to lock this 3-time felon (two of which were violent crimes) up for 50 years. He's eligible for parole at age 66 if he behaves.

This loser had the freedom to make the poor choices in life he's made. You can do something stupid, just know there will be an outcome. Choices and actions have consequences.

I came back from the hospital to take a shower and skimmed over all this. I probably missed out on a great deal of it but here's a few key points.

1) the united states government was founded on religious principles.
2) It is most certainly the job of ANY government to impose morality upon the citizens of that government. Otherwise criminals could rape, kill, steal and destroy without restriction. The increasingly futile trick is to impose morals that are both best for the society it governs while being acceptable to as many of the citizens of that society as possible.
3) I have never said I'm not prejudice at all. I am scientifically prejudice. I made that point more than once in my first post but didn't distill it to that small of a sentence. My only request was that anyone taking me to task be sure to fully read and fully understand my post. I'd have to say of all the dissenters, Firestart is the closest to having done that .

4) This topic will never be fully agreed upon by everyone and while I enjoy and encourage full debate on this I would again caution everyone against throwing or even insinuating insults. We're all adults here and should always treat each other with respect. Just look at my example. I still tolerate the ignorance of everyone who doesn't agree with me even though they don't yet realize I'm infallibly right .

Human Beings are not flies. Should the vast majority allow their ideals to be usurped by a very miniscule, but semantically gifted minority?

Just curious as to what everyones idea of progress is.

"Human Beings are not flies. Should the vast majority allow their ideals to be usurped by a very miniscule, but semantically gifted minority?"

I just meant it as an analogy. Or didn't you bother to read the whole post again?

"the vast majority", "semantically gifted minority".. I'm not blessed with the gift of understanding as was obvious from my previous posts, so you'll need to spell it out a bit clearer for me, who's what now?

bad analogy.
everyone knows (or at least I thought so) that you can't legislate morality. We agree, and I'm sincerely sorry if I offended you...I surely didn't mean to.
I wonder what everyone's idea of progress is, especially in a forum of anachronistic straight razor affecionados.

Why is it a bad analogy?

It seems everyone does not, since FUD says the opposite. You didn't offend me, I wouldn't know where, same goes for FUD.(but maybe that wasn't meant for me)

Now it seems to me that a lot of people have the same type of faith in science that I have in my God.

Take evolution, the simple fact that we share 95% of our genes with a type of monkey proves absolutely nothing. I've read that figure as well. It was presented by a scientist. He also (at the same time) explained that we share about 80% of our dna with some type of caterpillar....so does that mean that we're also related to the caterpillar? Of course not! There are just about as many holes in every theory that explains our existance. If you'd have read a bit more in depth about the subject you'd also know that the fact that there are still monkeys also makes the idea that we came from monkeys highly unlikable. Evolution is just like anything else a simple theory. Don't make an absolute truth out of something that still can't be proven as certain.

Now if you'd want to teach THAT in school etc and say: one of our theories is evolution, that means that.....
another one is..... and also..... etc.

I'd have no problem with that.
But don't call a theorie an absolute truth and then chase it with religion like fervor.

As for Gay mariage, sorry Joe, but even living in the Netherlands i'm against it. I have my reasons for it but I still don't believe that this is the place to discuss it. It's too impersonal and won't bring my real opinion across as it should. I believe that anyone can do as they please, yes that is true. But I don't believe that this is right or should be encouraged by law as if it's normal. I've said too much already I fear because some seem to be out on a witch hunt themselves.

Have a nice day gentlemen, this was my last reply to this topic. If you have anything to say to me you can pm, e-mail or even call me if you wish and I'd love to talk about it furthermore. But not here, and not now.

I personally do not see why science and belief God absolutely have to exclude each other. The problem is that some people take that if you don't blindly believe in everything you read in the Bible means that you don't believe in God. Also, just because I believe in God doesn't mean I don't believe in evolution or any other scientific principle.

Originally Posted by Stigmata

Human Beings are not flies. Should the vast majority allow their ideals to be usurped by a very miniscule, but semantically gifted minority?

Just curious as to what everyones idea of progress is.

Of course not, and I don't think it should be the other way around either. But I don't think we're talking about that here. Or maybe we're focusing on the wrong ideals. To me the primary ideal is the Constitution, and it doesn't allow someones rights to be prejudiced because they're homosexual. Now if giving them their rights somehow hurt you. I would look at it differently. Letting them have their rights wouldn't hurt your ideals unless your ideal as that they're not entitled to their rights.

So, exactly what ideal is it that's being usurped, and what is the source of the ideal?

1) yeah well, that's only a small part of the world, welcome to the opinion of the rest of it
2) No, it's a .gov's job to protect its citizens, not to moralize, that's why a rapist gets punished and one who talks back to his parents or wilfully ignores his siblings for years for instance does not. Rape harms, ignoring people does not(on a physical level), the first thing certainly is morally wrong, the second one can be. If a .gov's job was to moralize then you'd end up with no religion because the .gov would be your faith. (kind of like the USSR aspired)
3) prejudice stems from pride, pride is a sin.