Speaking Of Laws .....

[Dr. Shane]

Being temperate (not drinking alcohol) was a moral value until the 18th Ammendment was passed and it was make illegal. Then it became a law. Some years later when the 21st Ammendment repealed the 18th Ammendment, being temperate became a moral value again. The only difference was that when it was a law there was a civil authority to enforce it. Now that it is a moral value again, John Barlycorn must enforce it himself.

[cricket]

Morals cannot be enforced--they are individual beliefs. They can be learned, but not enforced. They are embodiments of thoughts made manifest through freedom of thinking.

Example:

Bill thinks about smoking and comes to the conclusion that smoking is bad for one's health. Bill decides that because smoking is bad fo one's health, smoking is bad for him. He has internalized the idea that smoking is bad and therefore believes that smoking is morally wrong. His moral: smoking is wrong.

Jane thinks about smoking and comes to the conclusion that smoking does little harm to one's health. Jane decides that because smoking is not so bad for a person, smoking is not bad for her. She has internalized the idea that smoking is okay and therefore thinks nothing morally wrong about the act. Her moral: smoking in all right.

Tom thinks about smoking and comes to the same conclusion as Bill: smoking is wrong. Tom is a legislator and lobbies a bill that outlaws smoking. Tom's brother Tim is a policeman who enforces the law against smoking.

Although Jane thinks nothing is morally wrong with smoking, she has no personal interest in smoking. Her parents smoke, her friends smoke. She'd just rather not.

Bill thinks smoking is bad for him. He thinks it is morally wrong. Still, he smokes as a result of addiction that he's had since he was 10. He can't seem to quit.

Tim (who happens to think his brother is a health freak and is wrong about the morality of smoking) also smokes, though it is against the law. He smokes when he's alone in the bathroom of his apartment and turns the air vent on so no other tenants will smell his smoke. Still, it is his job to enforce the law of no smoking when he's "on the beat."

Jane lives in an apartment next to Bill. She sees him every Sabbath going to church. She knows he's a devout Christian and has good kids.

Tim goes to visit his girlfriend, Jane, on his lunch break--he notices Bill smoking in the foyer and immediately fines him for breaking the law and gives him a warning that he'll have to take him to jail the next time he catches him.

Jane just rolls her eyes--knowing full well that Tim smokes every chance he can get. When she questions him about it, he just says, "Honey, I'm just doing my job. I don't like it anymore than you, but it's what I have to do."

After receiving his notice, Bill gets in his car and thinks, "Man, if I could quit, I would." Then, he lights another cigarette to calm his nerves about receiving the fine and figuring out a way to pay for it.

Each of these people has their own moral beliefs. They know the facts and they know what laws are in effect. Some agree that the laws are morally correct, some think they are ludicrous--just one man pushing his/her beliefs on society.

Laws are not morals. Morals are not laws. Morals are sometimes reflected in our laws. Sometimes laws are put in effect that go against the moral grain of those that must enforce the laws.

[Dr. Shane]

When I was 14 years old I was smoking in a bus station in Arizona and a policeman came up to me and made me put out my cigarette. How does that work again? <img src="/ubbtreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

When we pass a law making murder illegal it doesn't stop murder does it? No, it doesn't. However it does stop some people from murdering, just not all of them. So laws control some behavior, just not all behavior.

[cricket]

Laws can control our behavior, yes. They do not control our morals.

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

---

dgrimm60 said:

The bible has 2 verse in the bible 1 in HEBREWS 13:8

that said GOD is the same yesterday and today and

forever. the 2nd in MAL 3:6 for I am the LORD I chnage

not. WHY would GOD have different rules it does not

make sense to me.

---

[:"red"] "But if people have doubts about whether they should eat something, they shouldn't eat it. They would be condemned for not acting in faith before God. If you do anything you believe is not right, you are sinning." [/] Romans 14:23 NLT

Keep the faith!

[cricket]

Editing my last post (after editing time has expired):

I spoke too quickly and said that laws can control our behavior. Only people can control their behavior. Laws can have consequences that are viewed severe enough that people can choose to change their behavior.

Laws can make people stop and think abouttheir morals as well. Laws can encourage people to think about what we believe is right and wrong. People then, may change their morals, but it is not the law that is doing it: it is the person's individual choice.

[Dr. Shane]

Interesting article in Liberty Magazine

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

One of the most important political documents and political speeches ever delivered in our nation was Washington's Farewell Address. He pointed out that two foundations for political prosperity are religion and morality, and no one could be called an American patriot who attempted to separate politics from its two foundations

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

[cricket]

You might find this website to be interesting as well: History of Freemasonry

Quote:

---

U.S. Presidents who were Freemasons:

George Washington, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, James Polk, James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, James Garfield, William McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, William Taft, Warren Harding, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, and Gerald Ford.

Famous early Americans who were Freemasons:

Benjamin Franklin, John Hancock, Paul Revere, Benedict Arnold, Stephen Austin, Jim Bowie, David Crockett, and Sam Houston.

---

There is always, always more to the story than meets the public eye.

[Dr. Shane]

Why would that be interesting?

[cricket]

It is interesting to me that you don't find it interesting.

The article you posted has little to do with the conversation we'd been having. At least, not from my standpoint. I've been defending the notion that laws are not morals. The article you posted demonstrates that there is a common belief that our country's laws were based on morals; that our country's foundation is morally based.

I see nothing wrong in that argument. Absolutely, our laws are based on morals. But...

laws are NOT morals.

Additionally, the site I referenced should cause some concern in the reader as to exactly what sort of morals were being used in the foundation of our country.

[Dr. Shane]

Seems just a matter of semantics. A rose by any other name is still a rose.

[Naomi]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Shane said:

Seems just a matter of semantics. A rose by any other name is still a rose.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Sure 'bout that? Everything is relevant

[Dr. Shane]

Being temperate (not drinking alcohol) was a moral value until the 18th Ammendment was passed and it was make illegal. Then it became a law. Some years later when the 21st Ammendment repealed the 18th Ammendment, being temperate became a moral value again. The only difference was that when it was a law there was a civil authority to enforce it. Now that it is a moral value again, John Barlycorn must enforce it himself.

[Gregory Matthews]

Sorry, Shane, I do not think that it is simply a matter of semantics.

Christian society states that morality, and morals, are an atribute of God. God is the author of morals, and morality.

Secculary society states that in part, morality and morals are derived from law. Statute law (and perhaps case law) determine in part morals and morality. Secular society may acknowledge that there is some underlying notion in the colective conscious of humanity that is a source of morals and humanity. But, denies that as being related to God, and places it more in the colective experience throughout all of time, of human life.

While you do not realize that you are doing so, and are clearly a Christian of believes in God, your arguement that law is moral plays into the hands of seccular society. It takes the foundation for morality away from God, and places it in the laws that humans enact.

You may challenge me, if you please. But, my constructs, as I have listed them here, come from study I did during my graduate program in psychology. We were required to study ethics (morals) and application to life and psychology. In that program, the foundation was clearly laid out as I have done so here.

NOTE: If you understand what I have said, you will know that I reject such. I am a Christian who places morals and morality as founded in God, not the enacted laws of humans. I reject Shane's exposition of a seccular philosophy, regardless of the fact that he also likely agrees with me, and simply does not understand the ramifications of what he is saying.

[wicklunds]

Some laws ought to be enforced so that good people (ie: those who choose not to drink, solicit prostitutes, use or distribute addictive drugs/ substances, etc...) will not bear the brunt of unjust, societal degeneracy, regardless of what philosophical premise you hold to... Besides, God is the author of all that is good, and in these cases abstention is always good. ;-)

Dennis

[Gregory Matthews]

Dennis, of course. We ought to have law. Just laws ought to be enforced. God (the Bible) has clearly told us that we should have civil government. That involves law. You are also correct in saying that we ought to have law regardless of the foundation upon which it is based.

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Christian society states that morality, and morals, are an atribute of God. God is the author of morals, and morality.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

You will have to show me the Bible texts on that.

Remember I earlier posted that laws may not be good morals and we may not agree with them. I am not advocating that we use the law as our moral guide. I am simply pointing out the obvious: the law is a moral guide. I am not saying it is the only such guide or that it is the best guide. Obviously, as a Christian, I believe the Bible is the best moral guide.

As Brother Bravus pointed out with his dictionary difinitions. The difference between a law and a moral is that one has an enforcing authority while the other does not. Is murder and issue of morality or an issue of the law? What about speeding on the highway (which indangers lives and wastes fuel)? What about cheating on taxes? Are these issues of morality or law?

[cricket]

Bravus' definitions, Shane, were of two different types of words. One was a noun, one was an adjective. You say it is semantics and that it is irrelevant. I, on the other hand, believe that it is important to understand the difference in the definition of the words.

Morals are beliefs, they are not laws.

Laws are a list of rules and regulations (as well as the consequences that will likely be enforced when these rules are broken) that reflect certain morals.

I am finished with this discussion, because, quite frankly, I believe you are closed-minded to my thoughts. I have laid out my beliefs in a clear, concise manner. They are logical thoughts and they are consistent with logical thinking.

Any further discussion for me would prove to be fruitless.

[Dr. Shane]

We just have different prespectives. It doesn't seem to me to be an issue of having a closed mind. To me laws are a list of rules and regulations - like the Ten Commandments - which are also morals. Others don't see it that way. <img src="/ubbtreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

[Gregory Matthews]

Closed mind: Shane your resposne to me illlustrates her point. I stated that Christian society considers God to be the basis of morality. You asked me to quote you a Biblical text on that.

Of course, there is not Biblical text as to what 21sst Cent. Christian society does.

As to whether or not the Bible teaches that God is the basis of morality, which was likely your point, your response illustrates my point. You are teaching a morality that is based in human vaalues, expressed in law, and outside of God. If your really do not beleive that God (not humans) is the foundation of morality, then there is no reason to respond to you. You are fixed in a seccular standard.

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

You are teaching a morality that is based in human vaalues, expressed in law, and outside of God.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Please quote a portion of one of my posts where I have stated this. This is not what I am saying at all.

I have stated that laws are morals with an enforcing authority.

I have stated that such laws (or morals) may be good and they may be bad.

I have stated that we may not agree with such laws (or morals).

I have stated that the Bible has the perfect set of morals (or laws).

It is all about prespective. We are much closer to agreeing than it appears. Human laws are human morals although they are often based on divine principles. Nonetheless they are human and not perfect. That is why they change.

When someone says we cannot legislate morality it goes to show they don't understand what laws are. Laws are morality legislated. There are even laws in some areas against spitting on the sidewalk. Isn't that an issue of morality?

[cricket]

Quote:

---

It is all about prespective. We are much closer to agreeing than it appears.

---

I agree with Shane. One of the only differences that he and I have is the difference between using these words: He says laws are morals. I say laws represent morals.

Other than that, I really say I must agree with Shane.

[Dr. Shane]

Tax credits for hybrid cars???? Would that have anything to do with morality?

[cricket]

Well, now, I would have thought you'd argue that this is the law (moral issue) of saving our environment.

Taking it from my standpoint, I would say that this law represents a moral of saving our environment.

Here's another thought all together: the law of gravity has nothing to do with morals whatsoever.

[Dr. Shane]

There are moral laws and laws of nature. I have heard some make the point that moral laws are also laws of nature (science) but I am not completely convinced of that yet.

How about mandatory evacuation for huricanes? Another moral law?