Conservatives Should Government Legislate Morality

Can the government legislate morality?

Between “Can" and “Should" there are many shades of grey. A government can pretty much create legislation that affects every facet of human behaviour. That was the driving force behind the Bill of Rights. Prohibiting Congress from legislating in regards to the most basic areas that defined people as individuals. The rights to think and speak freely, to chose their own religion, to defend themselves and their beliefs, to be secure in their own homes, to have a free press, to be free of the threat of torture or arbitrary jailing and all the other freedoms Americans enjoy.As they say, the devil is in the details. The main devil is the tyranny of the majority as Jefferson pointed out. In a democracy the majority often feels they have the right to pass laws they believe are for the greater good. They can always justify themselves, often in very narrow ways. Thus the need for a Court to ride herd on the legislative and administrative functions of government.Now prohibiting the federal government from infringing on specific areas of morality is one thing. Stopping people from trying to legislate morality is quite another. This can be done in very insidious ways. The Defense of Marriage act is a prime example. There is no Constitutional prohibition on legislating “for" something eh? And only when someone objects enough to get such infringements to the Supreme Court can such backdoor attempts be corrected.There are areas that almost everyone agrees that laws governing moral behavior are necessary, even good. Murder, rape, child molesting, theft, etc. are all areas that require legislative measures. And again the devil is in the details. Where does one draw the line? Murder in self defense? Age of consent? As I said initially, there's a lot of grey areas for the politicians to muck around in.

As a liberal, what frightens you most about what the conservatives want to do?

I could list a few things, but I’ve found it best to pick one thing and hope that maybe people that feel differently than I will read it and hear something from another side of the spectrum.I’m not sure that “frighten” is the right word, but I feel that education inequality is a HUGE problem in this country. Conservatives always throw out the same “solutions” to this problem without realizing that they solve nothing. Those solutions are consistently some form of education “voucher” system so people can send their kids to private schools instead and the GIGANTIC pile of garbage called school of choice.First, vouchers. I can’t possibly figure out how the right thinks this could possibly be balanced. All this ever says to me is that the people in power that talk about this being a solution care so little about the money they spend on things that they literally don’t realize how much private schools actually cost. Giving vouchers to someone who is impoverished will still, most likely, not come anywhere near the cost of tuition at a private school.Secondly, school of choice. This is always presented as a solution, and, sure, it seems reasonable, but how can you tell an poor American in an urban area that they shouldn’t complain about the elementary school around the corner from them when they can easily send their kids to any school they want to because of school choice? 99% of the time, that better school is 15–20 miles away and there’s no free bus to get there and that poor family can’t afford a car anyway. This is just an additional way of society punishing those on the bottom rungs.I consistently fail to understand why republicans never simply say “let’s do what we need to do to make all public schools as great as our best public school.” From a personal perspective, I live in a somewhat upscale, predominantly white outer suburb of Detroit. My kids go to a GREAT public school, and I feel they’re getting a pretty quality education. I don’t understand why we can’t work as a NATION to make sure that kids living in poorer urban areas get the same, high quality, FREE education that my kids get.Conservatives always talk about how they want our country to be better than other nations in the world, I can’t think of anything more patriotic than making sure our kids are better educated than the rest of the world.

Does the law legislate morality?

Of course it does, and it’s silly to argue otherwise.It’s against the law to own slaves. Why? Because we think it’s morally reprehensible.It’s against the law to kill. Why? The same.It’s against the law to steal. Why? The same.Now, is morality and the law the same thing? Absolutely not. There are many things that are legal that we would hold to be immoral and many things that are moral that are illegal.The law and morality overlap but they have different aims. The law seeks, above all, to establish law and order. Therefore, theoretically, the law will only prohibit or mandate something if it will promote human beings living in relative harmony. It is why our Declaration guarantees “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” because if people don’t have these things at a minimum, they are apt to rebel. Furthermore, the law only pertains to action. You may wish to rob a bank, but if you don’t do it, then the law will leave you be.Morality deals with the elusive goals of good and evil, whatever that may be to you. Therefore morality will deal with all aspects of human behavior and even thought. And that’s the crux of it. Laws are common to all but morality is both corporate and personal. And because many people will value many different things, the law grants latitude for people to do things some might say is wrong. Like lying to your wife, or cheating at a game or calling in sick and going to the ballgame.The problem is when some people try to make their peculiar morality the law for all. And sometimes that’s a bad thing. Not always, though. Slavery was once held to be moral until the government forced it on everyone after a bloody and destructive Civil War. Women’s voting rights, gay marriage all are instances where the government forced a change because what people believed to be right changed.That’s why we have Freedom of Speech. Because it is an ongoing debate where the law begins and where morality may reach.

Why do leftists only believe in morals that the government can enforce?

Morals that the government enforces? Like the religious police in Saudi Arabia or countries that enact Sharia Law? Those are conservative values, not “leftist” ones.Progressives, including the founding fathers, instead believe in enshrining human rights. Granting specific things which the government cannot do to individual citizens, and to a lesser extent, prohibiting citizens from infringing on inherent rights in specific necessary areas (like equal employment or housing). Is this what you are talking about, forcing the “morals” that you cannot discriminate against black job applicants?If so, that is an interesting way to characterize the upholding of individual rights. Quite different from imposing a broad morality that does not stem from individual rights, but rather restricts or oppresses these rights we all hold.