Should the government be involved in making laws to regulate moral behavior? If so, to what extent?

[IronSheep]

[purplepoppy]

You get tax breaks if your married rather than just co inhabiting. Surely that's the government regulating morality.

[Kaazsz]

Great point. So true!

[NearlyNapping]

In the US it's the opposite. There is a marriage penalty. So for taxes you are better off just living together than getting married.

[Saffygirl]

Nope.
My country tried seventy years ago and it ended veeeery badly

[roy_ricky09]

Follow

[ladsin]

Well this is kind of a strange question. I think in some sense all laws are loosely based on morality. We make it illegal because it’s wrong to kill as well as detrimental to a functioning society. We prohibit stealing for the same. We have a graduated income tax because politicians believe it’s moral to tax the rich at a higher rate than we tax the poor, etc. That said, the laws may not always be moral even though people think they are, see the slavery laws we used to have as an example.

Additionally I wrote this long response to a lady below, but I think it’s worth citing it here as well for others. “Nobody knows how many laws we have in the US, but the most exhaustive attempt was headed by the Justice Department to calculate just how many criminal laws there were, but stopped after two years with over 3000 before they said “fuck it” and stopped because Congress changed a bevy of laws and the departmental official said, “you will have died and [been] resurrected three times, and still not have an answer to this question.” This is because as of the 1980s there were already more than 22,000 pages of federal criminal law and congress typically adds ~150 new laws per year.

So for an absurdly low estimate just for the sake of argument say there’s 3,000 laws in America. There’s only 613 laws in the Bible, so even if America adopted every single one of them it would make up less than a fifth of our federal legal code. By no stretch of the imagination near half. Further we know that almost none of these biblical laws are accepted in our legal system. Just of the frequently cited (incorrect) Ten Commandments the first four are unconstitutional under the first amendment, the fifth is about honoring your parents which isn’t illegal, the sixth murder is illegal, the seventh on adultery isn’t illegal, eighth on stealing is, ninth on bearing false witness is in certain settings, and lastly the law against envy which our entire market system is largely based on is not illegal.

So if I’m being entirely generous and willing to grant that those three things (murder, theft, and bearing false witness in certain contexts) are illegal because of the Bible (I don’t, all societies have laws regarding them) that would mean less than a thousandth of our laws are biblically based.

Hopefully this helped a bit.”

[curiousnorway]

Yes, it should and my country is already doing it. Such things like rape, murder, theft, driving too fast, drunk driving, violence, scamming, forgery, refusing to paying taxes etc. are already illegal. Almost all countries regulate it to different extents and most societies aren't anarchy. Morals and ethics are quite similar. Both are questions about what's right and wrong.

[OlderAndWiser]

Define "regulating moral behavior." Murder is immoral behavior and I think the government should regulate it. Some people think homosexuality is immoral behavior but I don't want the government regulating what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes.

[CoffeeWC]

No. But liberals would disagree with that.

[SuperManiac]

Values are the primary means by which we get people to adhere to ethical behavior as I see it. Laws are a last resort measure as I see it, and I don't see the purpose of laws to enforce morality.

Laws exist to protect human rights as I see it. Another view is that they're there to protect your property, starting with your own body, but also extending to your possessions. If people forcefully violate your property by damaging it, stealing it, taking ownership against your will, then laws are there to protect against such force with force.

But if laws become numerous, you tend to end up with more corruption and sometimes even an undermining of morality in society.

[SuperManiac]

I've seen comedians joke that if we didn't have laws against murder, all of us would be murdering each other left and right. While amusing, I don't believe that to be the case. I don't think most of us would suddenly start abandoning our values and killing each other absent such a law.

What might more likely happen is that without such a law, there might be a minority of people already inclined towards killing who might start going on a killing spree, and many would be helpless in protecting themselves against such killers absent laws and armed officers to enforce them. And then they might even start to take power over the system.

A law against murder is there to protect against such a case as I see it, but I believe that values independent of laws are what prevents most of us from killing each other more than anything else. The law doesn't give us values. It protects against violations of our human rights.

[SuperManiac]

Also just because something is wrong according to most doesn't necessarily mean the optimal solution is to make it illegal. Prohibition, for example, put the nation in a much worse state than when alcohol was legal, because it skyrocketed crime, bootlegging, turned neighborhoods into gang turfs with violence spilling into the streets, making it easier for minors to get alcohol, lead to more alcohol poisoning deaths, etc. So I really think we should exercise hesitance about making something illegal just because we believe it's immoral.

[Deathraider]

I mean pretty much down to it’s core any laws that are made are really basically telling what one ought and ought not do. So technically it could be called regulating moral behaviors already.

I would argue that regulating things like which religion you can practice or pornography or even restricting gay marriage, these laws are arbitrary. Why? Because they don’t really affect other people. You aren’t forcing anyone to have a gay marriage at all. In my views, laws are arbitrary when they affect people livelihood and that these behaviors don’t affect anyone.

[Guardian45]

Yes & No.

Yes, because companies, especially transnationals, like Facebook, are solely-motivated by profits and cannot be trusted to be good corporate citizens. They only care about shareholder's interests. Therefore, they require government regulation to compel them to industry compliance and protection of people, society and the environment.

No, because there are necessary limits to big government's controls and manipulation of people. For example, observe the total control of the Chinese goverment's grip over their population through their 'social credit' system and their manipulation of companies like Huawei. Chillingly 1984!

[BrittBratt2416]

um... they already do. That's why we have laws. Half the laws we follow are mainly from the Bible. We have laws against stealing, murder, cheating.. etc and if we do these things they have a consequence and that consequence is usually jail time or a big fine. All these are regulated by the government.

[ladsin]

Wait what? Nobody knows how many laws we have in the US, but the most exhaustive attempt was headed by the Justice Department to calculate just how many criminal laws there were, but stopped after two years with over 3000 before they said “fuck it” and stopped because Congress changed a bevy of laws and the departmental official said, “you will have died and [been] resurrected three times, and still not have an answer to this question.” This is because as of the 1980s there were already more than 22,000 pages of federal criminal law and congress typically adds ~150 new laws per year.

So for an absurdly low estimate just for the sake of argument say there’s 3,000 laws in America. There’s only 613 laws in the Bible, so even if America adopted every single one of them it would make up less than a fifth of our federal legal code. By no stretch of the imagination near half. Further we know that almost none of these biblical laws are accepted in our legal system. Just of the frequently cited (incorrect) Ten Commandments the first four are unconstitutional under the first amendment, the fifth is about honoring your parents which isn’t illegal, the sixth murder is illegal, the seventh on adultery isn’t illegal, eighth on stealing is, ninth on bearing false witness is in certain settings, and lastly the law against envy which our entire market system is largely based on is not illegal.

So if I’m being entirely generous and willing to grant that those three things (murder, theft, and bearing false witness in certain contexts) are illegal because of the Bible (I don’t, all societies have laws regarding them) that would mean less than a thousandth of our laws are biblically based.

Hopefully this helped a bit.

[BrittBratt2416]

@ladsin I was only referring to those laws as example cause they are the ones we follow the most because the government enforces those laws not all of the 10 commandments. Cheating doesn't always have to be adultery, there other ways of cheating, such as cheating your taxes which has a huge consequence. So yes that would definitely be going against the law.

[ladsin]

You’re saying that you only follow 6-8 of the federal criminal laws? Be careful who you tell that to.

Also, the “no cheating” is just an attempt at twisting the Bible to fit your purposes. The phrase “tnə·’āp̄” is used only twice in the Bible and both times is translated adultery. Are you suggesting that someone is committing adultery on their taxes?

I’m also confused on what you’re trying to say. In your initial post you said, “Half the laws we follow are mainly from the Bible” now you said, “I was only referring to those laws as example cause they are the ones we follow the most because the government enforces those laws not all of the 10 commandments” which I don’t understand. I think you’re trying to say that we follow almost half of the Ten Commandments because they’re written in our legal code? Why not just say we follow the laws that have been written. I’ve never not murderered because the Bible says not to.

[BrittBratt2416]

@ladsin Okay what the hell are you talking about? No im not saying that, but you are making assumptions. And no, im not twisting the bible at all so i have no idea where you got that from. Cheating is weather it's in the eyes of society or God is still considered wrong. I did say we follow the laws that have written, we follow the ones that have been written by God and take from the bible. What happens when you steal? Jail, Kill someone? Prison. I have not murdered someone because of the bible and I just don't see a reason to.

[ladsin]

I’m really confused on what you’re trying to say, so maybe you could try and explicate on what you’re saying.

The Bible does not say “thou shalt not cheat.” It says “thou shalt not commit adultery” and I gave the Hebrew so you can check it in a concordance yourself.

“we follow the ones that have been written by God and take from the bible” we don’t though. We at best follow a small handful of the 613 laws from the Bible. We also have thousands of laws that don’t come anywhere from the Bible that we adhere to daily, so the Bible is irrelevant to our adherence and formation of legislation.

The Ten Commandments aren’t even the first penal code ever written. Hammurabi’s code predates it by quite a while and outlaws many of the same things. Do we then follow Hammurabi’s code because it predates the Bible and also outlaws theft, murder, etc?

[BrittBratt2416]

@ladsin sigh... dude, how hard is to understand? I said we follow most not all laws from the Bible. When it comes to government laws those are the ones that are enforced by the government the most. Is the government going to through you in jail if you cheat on you're spouse? No, of course not. Is the goverment going to through you in jail if you murder your spouse-absolutely. A law that is taken from the bible and practiced. The other ones are for us to love God and respect and love our fellow man/neighbor. You going way to deep with this lol

[ladsin]

I can’t understand you because your writing is terrible. I’m trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you just keep saying things that are wrong. You keep saying that we follow most of the Bible’s laws. This just isn’t true no matter how many times you say it. There are 613 laws given in the Bible less than 5 are in our legal code, so in no way shape or form do we follow most of the Bible’s laws. Because this is so obvious I’m sure you must mean something other than what you’re saying, because according to your profile you’re in your 20s so I’m sure you can do elementary math.

That said, at this point this conversation seems to be going nowhere and is just frustrating me due to repetition 😂
Have a nice day ma’am.

[BrittBratt2416]

@ladsin My writing is not terrible, obviously you do know what saying sense you keep replying. Brush up on your comprehension skills. Most of us do follow the laws from the bible, We follow the ones that are enforced by the government, and we follow the ones by moral. People often dislike people who lie, cheat, steal, kill etc... This conversation was going no where the moment you replied.

[BrittBratt2416]

Have a nice day sir, next time you want to make yourself feel important do it when it's not wasting someone's time or your time.

[ladsin]

“obviously you do know what saying sense”
“we follow the ones by moral.”
😂😂

[BrittBratt2416]

@ladsin... mmkay.

[MarkRet]

As far as consensual behavior between people, no. As far as deliberately trying to offend people with disgusting behavior, yes, as in fines. An example would be like those balls hanging off the back of trucks. Nobody needs to see that. If you want to show that off, great, pay a daily fine for it.

[BeMuse]

Serial killers think it’s fine to chop someone up when they get the urge. Different people have different moral boundaries. When you live in a society the line has to be drawn somewhere and in a democracy the majority are the ones that get to draw that line via legislation.

[almondcake]

I dont know what country you live in but in the UK it is against the law to swear , not often enforced but can be. It is illegal to be naked in a public place unless it is an apropiate place , naturist beach etc. Obusive comments are verbal assault. So our goverment does regulate immoral behaviour but moral behaviour? Why would they?

[JamesBoradil03]

fuck no. that is some communists shit. there is a reason our forefathers gave us freedom of speech, and the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. our laws regulate the important things like dont kill, but being moral and what we say is completly up to us. this is the dumbest question i have seen on GaG period. fucking comy

[-Asca-]

Not to kill is a question of morality, so is granting people freedom of speech and liberty.

[JamesBoradil03]

@-Asca- but it is not a god-given-right as the forefathers put it.

[-Asca-]

God doesn't interfere with rights and what your forefathers said is meaningless.

[JamesBoradil03]

@-Asca- i agree saying im not christian. but what our forefathers said shaped america. yes not all of it was good, but a lot of it was. freedom of speech and belief are things that shuold never be take away. do you really want to live in communist russia or south korea?

[-Asca-]

I am not American so I don't care about your nicht particular forefathers. By the way those filthy russians and koreans (don't you mean the northern ones?) had forefathers too. Freedom of speech is important to even decide what is moral and what is not, if we abolish freedom of speech that becomes arbitrary and therefor morality becomes worthless. I think that is the biggest mistake communist russia made, rather than actually being communist.

[JamesBoradil03]

@-Asca- there's a reason it has never worked before

[Edanurus]

Morality is subjective, my morality is different from others. I guess all laws are down to morality, but not completely. government is there for the will of the people, it may seem fine if you agree with the people in charge but the government imposing their morality on the people is just oppression.

[CurvyPryde32]

Good filter to use here is the question "Is there a victim?" And I don't count someone with hurt feelings as a victim. A real victim such as a vitim of robbery, rape, or murder. That is when the law should step in.

[Guardian45]

Are you saying that a violent crime has to be committed before the law should be involved?

[CurvyPryde32]

@Guardian45 no I am saying that there should be a victim. Scams are non-violent but there is a victim for example. Trying to say outlaw gay marriage though.. well where is the victim?

[Guardian45]

Ahhhhhh! Agreed!

[Piteka5]

It's am interesting question, if you see medieval Christian ethics or Rousseau there is an emphasis on personal acts that are not guided by any law, but apart from those points most thinkers defend that law should intervene.

I personally think there should be a great deal of freedom to behave in our own morality, but a baseline should be provided by law

[morimeme1]

Could you give an example. The way I undertant it is that our laws are already based on the modern morals and everything that is truly immoral is illegal so thay already do that...

[lomimore]

The extent they have right now is just fine, we don't want next for someone to be punished by law because they lied to their mom or cheated on their So

[Anonymous]

The government already controls my money, my rights, my options of abortion, I won’t be ok allowing the government setting laws for how I should behave! I like my freedom to be and act as I please.

[Kaazsz]

This is the best anti conservative statement ever. Gets straight to the core of conservative principles if only the stupid liberals could wake up and see it. Conservatives are for government intervention in your moral lives. You all waste time calling them bigots when the truth is that they want the population to follow THEIR set of morals and moral doctrine (the Bible.)

[Opinion Owner]

Thank you! I totally agree with your last sentence! 😃👍🏼

[PressOn]

Huh? What is "THEIR set of morals?" Morals are morals. Just because you reason in your heart/mind that fornication is not a sin doesn't change that it is. You can say you want to live immoral but you can't diminish morals. The purpose of denying morals is to soothe the conscience while living in sin. Conservatives did not create morals that's just ludicrous.

[Kaazsz]

Conservatives get their morals from the Bible silly.

[videmon]

Moral is cultural and it wouldn't be possible since usually under it is multi cultural society.
But having a law I would say will be more beneficial

[TadCurious]

Murder is immoral. I think it's a pretty good exercise of government authority to enact laws against it.