Quote:
Originally posted by ladygreek
@Kimmie1913
Soror, if I ever need a lawyer, I know who to call 
|
Thanks Soror LadyGreek! I try!
Doggy,
I agree with your take on how moral beliefs and the law interact. My post was not about discounting the soundness, veracity or credibility of anyone's moral belief on the issue, just to express my assessment based on how things do operate within our government and country. I do tend towards a civil libertarian view on much of this only because I have not yet reconciled religious freedom against imposing one set of morals on everyone. There is, for me, a tension between the idea of freedom of religion and codifying any one faith’s beliefs. Just as these beliefs have stood, steadfast for thousands of years, so has the tension between various faiths. Countries have been torn apart; wars have been fought over conflicting religious views. That is my struggle as a legal scholar and a person with her own deeply held moral beliefs. Codification of a moral belief can be tantamount to religious persecution and I think that is the wrong result. In a country that alleges freedom of religion, that tension continues to exist. Each person who believes strongly in their position, believes he or she is right on this issue. At this point, I am of the opinion that the law should allow each individual the freedom to live out their beliefs. (With the limitations I expressed in my previous post)
Does this approach have a down side? Absolutely. As you described, it often requires that the weakest stance be codified and individuals be called upon to choose to live a higher standard. That means those that do are often surrounded by those that don’t. Every act that is a sin is not illegal. Therefore, those that do not cheat on their spouse are surrounded by those that do. Those that do not engage in premarital sex are surrounded by those that do. So on and so forth. Personally, I think for many people, even those that identify themselves as sharing one faith or another, are more fearful of the justice system than the wrath of God. Not killing because you would go to jail rather than because it is wrong does not make you a true follower of the Word.
On the issue of church and state, I do not believe in the way many of the decisions on this matter are carried out. Again, because I believe in personal choice, I believe that separation of church and state does not require the removal of all religion from schools but the inclusion of all. I think that it means that the state may not dictate religion not that it has a duty to suppress it. Obviously, this is not the opinion of the judiciary on this matter.
Like LadyGreek, I do not purport to be a Biblical scholar and would not attempt to engage in a discussion of how the Bible deals with this issue. I do not consider those who feel strongly about this issue to automatically to be judgmental or bigoted. Some people show a particular venom over this topic that earns them those titles. That impression is not based on their objection or religion but their words and actions. I do agree, however, that many automatically bestow those titles to anyone in opposition. (a typical occurrence in any heated argument that prevents significant discussion form taking place)