Nathan Key

Husband, Father, Thinker.

 

 
 

Continued from last Thursday.

I am almost tempted to side with the "moral majority" on this issue because of a few I remember reading from Jefferson and Adams where they basically came out and said- this system of limited government isn't going to work if people abandon God. But then I remember what happens when religions feel like people are abandoning "the faith." Things get ugly. Sometimes bloody.

Which is why I'm glad that Churches aren't in control of the army here in our country.

But this isn't to say that governments are better at dictating morality. I don't believe that at all. In fact, I think they're pretty terrible at it. Now, there's nothing particularly "wrong" with governments dictating morals. Most of world history is full of this sort of thing. In fact, Liberty and Limited Government are relatively new ideas compared to dictatorship and tyranny. But it's only very rarely that a benevolent leader was in charge and things ran rather smoothly and peacefully because the morality that was dictated came from a good heart.

The trouble is, leaders aren't always good. And inevitably a lot of them make terrible, selfish choices that actually hurt their people rather than help them. And when evil men are in charge of dictating morality- you have the Inquisition and the Holocaust. You get persecution and genocide.

Interestingly enough, I think part of the problem we have today here in the US isn't that we're too immoral. I think there is plenty of morality. The problem is that we've slipped into a government system where too much power is in the hands of the President and Legislator. Both Republicans and Democrats bring their "morality" into Congress and pass laws based on restraining or enabling the morality of the people.

We've heard the term culture war quite often over the past 10 years and I think the reason liberals and conservatives are so wary of each other isn't the political, but rather religious and moral ideas that each party holds.

Liberals are concerned with the environment for moral reasons. The same is true for systemic poverty and education. These aren't simply political issues for them, they are very religious and moral.

The same can be said of Conservatives who are concerned with unborn babies and upholding their own ideal of what marriage should look like. These aren't simply political issues, either- they speak to the very core of their being and spring from a moral/religious code within them.

Whenever one side or the other makes it into the White House or takes a majority in Congress, fear grips the other side. There's a sense of impending DOOM that the Republicans or Democrats are going to ruin the world with their ideals. I firmly believe that is evidence that we've actually given TOO much moral and religious power over to the government rather than the reverse. These are ideals and values that are at war. And if they were left to the community and churches to decide (as they were originally intended to be), I think our nation would be much better off.

 


Comments

Mr. G

Tue, 30 Jun 2009 08:05:22

Thought provoking as always, Nate. I'd suggest that ALL laws are a regulation of morals. The questions of whether I have the right to steal from another, or take the life of another, are moral questions. The question about whether you or a government entity has the right to stop me from doing those things, that is a moral question. So in my mind the question is not, "should government regulate morals?" because it should and it does. The question, I think, is "Whose morals should provide the template for those regulations?" The founders believed that Christianity provided the perfect standard for both morality and law.

The Founders also recognized, however, that absent a moral foundation within the populace, that the the government framework they established would inevitably fail. A few quotes:

[I]t is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams

[W]e have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. . . . Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. - John Adams

[N]either the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt. - Samuel Adams

Our liberty depends on our education, our laws, and habits . . . it is founded on morals and religion, whose authority reigns in the heart, and on the influence all these produce on public opinion before that opinion governs rulers. - Fisher Ames

[O]nly a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters. - Benjamin Franklin

The practice of morality being necessary for the well being of society, He [God] has taken care to impress its precepts so indelibly on our hearts that they shall not be effaced by the subtleties of our brain. We all agree in the obligation of the moral principles of Jesus and nowhere will they be found delivered in greater purity than in His discourses. - Thomas Jefferson

While just government protects all in their religious rights, true religion affords to government its surest support. - George Washington

[T]he [federal] government . . . can never be in danger of degenerating into a monarchy, and oligarchy, an aristocracy, or any other despotic or oppressive form so long as there shall remain any virtue in the body of the people. - George Washington


Like you, however, I also believe that the Federal Government has far overstepped its bounds. I don't think it is a result of too much moral regulation by the government, it is the simply the result of too much regulation and interference by the government in general.

 

Keith Milsark

Tue, 30 Jun 2009 10:05:21

I tend to agree with Mr. G, although I wouldn't say ALL laws are regulation of morals. Laws against murder, rape, theft, etc. are moral laws. But the Oregon legislature just banned the use of handheld cell phones while driving. That's not a moral law. That's government interference in people's personal lives. Unfortunately, as a society, we have reached the point where we look to government for just about everything: job security, retirement income, healthcare, you name it. And it's a cycle: the more we demand government "do something", the more it will do, which puts us into a dependence mode, in which we concede ever more control over our lives to the government.

The control government has is staggering. Why is the high beam indicator on your dashboard a blue light that looks like a headlight with lines coming out of it? Because the government mandates it. Why are there "Nutrition Facts" on packages of food? Because government mandates it. Why are computers and printers and other devices marked as "energy stars"? Because the government mandates it. Why will you be unable to buy incandescent light bulbs in a few years? Because the government has mandated them out of existence. It happens so quietly, so stealthily, that people don't even realize the scope of control that government has. And it's our own fault.

Maybe we have gotten too big for self-government.

 

FTP Blog

Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:10:17

Interesting stuff. Going off what Mr. G said about "Whose morals should provide the template for those regulations?", I am reminded of the words of Lao Tzu.

"When the Great Way disappears, we meet kindness and justice
When reason appears we meet great deceit
When the six relations fail, we meet obedience and love
When the country is in chaos, we meet honest officials"

To add to what has already been mentioned, I think the role of Capitalism should not be understated. For instance, consider the late 80s or early 90s when George Bush Sr. made a statement pertaining to the advent of a new world order; here is an individual who had been a high official of the CIA, now President - All this in addition to his private business endeavors. When I think of the "culture wars" and put the idea within the structure of Capitalism, I get a heavy sense of "the stakes": global domination. And part of the solution almost always goes back to the people.

Is Saudi Arabia too religious for a representative democracy?
Is the US too secular for representative democracy?
Who did the bail-out plan assist, for the most?
Does the US government have a lot of honest officials?

A decent post still.

 



Leave a Reply