Opinion on a very important topic

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
<p><em>But the legislators who initiated the law are elected by the community. Could it be their constituents wanted this law? If so, it's the community not the govt. imposing this.</em></p>

<p>Yes, people who want to legislate morality can and do vote.</p>

<p>That scares me. The "do" part, not the "can" part. I'll fight to the death for their right to vote. In the meantime, I'll keep voting against them.</p>
 
<p>That is true. The majority should not stomp on the minority. </p>

<p>But unfortunately, it's majprity rule. Otherwise, why do we have elections? The ones with the most votes win. And for the one in the minority, if you think that certain legislations are unfair. It's in you God given rights to change within that electoral process.</p>

<p> </p>
 
Reason, that is true to a certain extent except the majority cannot deny individuals "certain unalienable rights" including "life liberty and the pursuit of happiness"





While majority usually rules, the founding father made sure that certain rights are protected. . . that's why we have the Bill of Rights and the court system. . .First Amendment: Freedom of Expression.. .
 
<p>So it's really not the govt. that imposes these moral standards. Since it goes back to the "community" that had voted these elected officials in. So it's the community that is imposing the standards.</p>

<p>And if the minority think this is unfair. Get to the voting booths and try to win next time. It's a free country.</p>
 
Despite all the barely legal outfits we see on TV, Americans are actually quite prude. Most of our beaches don't even allow topless.
 
Yes, the first amendment and freedom of expression. But like my law professor once said. It's freedom with responsibility. Not freedom to do whatever you feel like. This country is built on law and order. Not chaos.
 
The responsibility part comes from one's morals. . . not from the government. . .





The Supreme Court has been pretty clear. . . the freedom of expression is almost absolute unless it harms another person. . . You can look stupid if you want.. .you just can't hurt another person while doing it. . .





BTW: I named this topic with my tongue squarely in my cheek. . . but to my pleasant surprise, the title has turn out to be prophetic.. . .
 
<p><em>"But unfortunately, it's majprity rule. Otherwise, why do we have elections? The ones with the most votes win. And for the one in the minority, if you think that certain legislations are unfair. It's in you God given rights to change within that electoral process."</em></p>

<p>Sorry, but this is not true. This country was not founded on majority rule. This country was not founded as a democracy. It was founded as a republic. The difference being, a democracy is mob, (majority), rule. A republic is ruled by law.</p>
 
<p>awgee,</p>

<p>I think it's both. Hence, we have democrats and republicans? And if it's not majority rules, then who are voted into office? Certainly, not by the minority.</p>
 
<p>Awgee,</p>

<p>I've been stewing on your last comment - which I found simple and brilliantly-put.</p>

<p>This distinction is profound.</p>

<p>It is no surprise that so many around the world cannot, or will not, grasp this. I'm not sure we're really making the right case.</p>

<p>Iraq is a textbook example.</p>

<p>As much as we may complain about our own government - we got this one thing very right.</p>

<p> </p>
 
Since this is "Opinion on a very important topic" I'm looking for one. Janet I hope you can help (seriously). Is it a big fashion faux pas to wear black shoes with a navy skirt?
 
<p>I doubt it anymore.</p>

<p>I'm a matchy-match kind of girl, but that is now apparently passe!</p>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top