Quote:
Originally posted by hot_pastrami
Of course that boundary is defined by the individual, and that's why I think that a community's law is an attempt to commonalize that boundary as much as possible.
|
The law must be *agreed upon* by as many of the members of the community as possible. It's a compromise: restriction of one person's freedoms to preserve those of another person. And for that reason, the fewer of them there are the better.
I'm really resistant to the notion that "the purpose of the law is to enforce morality", because many people subscribe to religious beliefs that they claim define morality.
Next thing you know, you have laws that bars can't be open on Sunday, or that the official "pledge of allegiance" is to a "nation under God", or that homosexuals should be stoned to death, all in the name of morality. Morals are *individual* values. The stated purpose of law here in the US is to "establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty". Not to enforce morality.
Let's try to keep church and state separate, OK?
(Besides, I never <i>promised</i> to not pack heat in New Jersey... :-) )