| 
|
Page: Profile: Wren's Nest News Local
| Total Views: 4,945,850
|
Article: 17349
[Civil]
Date Posted:
2/25/2007
8:49:54 am EST
Wvox Stats
Views: 8,146
RSS: 19,441
Comments: 16
|
To Do - Or Not To Do - Whatever We Want To Do
Author: Frank Miele Source: Daily Inter Lake (MT)
Title: TO DO - OR NOT TO DO - WHATEVER WE WANT TO DO
Shame is nothing new.
In the Bible, it is present in man from the beginning, from Genesis, from the time when Adam and Eve discover their nakedness in the Garden of Eden and are ashamed and cover themselves.
We need not debate the veracity of the Bible to understand the psychological legitimacy of this story, which illustrates how self-consciousness has a built-in censor which guides our conduct and shapes our behavior.
It is that internal, essentially human, self-consciousness which is the seed of what the philosophers call “natural law,” and thus we can say that individual self-consciousness has an elemental role in mankind’s continuing urge to legislate and to regulate human behavior. In a very real sense, the legal system is society’s way of imposing shame on those who lack an adequate amount of it on their own.
To the libertarian, of course, this is a challenge.
| Options: [Read Full Story] [Comments Locked]
[Email to a Friend]
|
|
Community Thoughts: There are 16 comments posted | Reverse Sort |
| Big Nose, Small Brain | Feb 26th. at 9:26:17 pm EST
|
Terry (Irvington, Virginia) - Email Me
This article gives the impression that the writer deserves the benefit of the doubt. He seems to have a big nose trying to stick itself in things which are none of his business, due to a lack of functional literacy. RRR leaders instead are dangerous because they do understand issues which are repeatedly misrepresented in this article, and direct malicious intent to circumvent the rule of law while using it as a weapon.
Can we say 14th Amendment?
Nowhere does this article note how many "morality codes" were legal in states, but never for US government, up until the 14th Amendment added "equal protections" and "Incorporation Doctrine", extending the Bill of Rights inside states as of 1868. It took the 1870's to enact a series of civil rights acts to implement that, one of which (42 USC 1983) is among the most actively used laws still today.
He's right that the ACLU would likely oppose the Declaration of Independence were a similar document promulgated today, playing on religous prejudices to incite a bloody revolution. The ACLU's huge benefit and serious limit are one and the same, that a bunch of well meaning lawyers mostly doing important work are among the leadership. Lawyers are indoctrinated and sworn to uphold their legal system, even when sometimes the Supreme Court screws up badly, or when last resort Constitutional remedies which might result in dead lawyers (and other court officers or corrupt government actors) rather than empowered ones are within the scope of our Constitution's legal process. But, pretty much every other remark about the ACLU shows a gross illiteracy in US Constitutional law, based on present fact and amendments of law. Lest we forget, the Constitution, pre or post 14th Am, did not exist in those times, while the Articles of Confederation were tried and failed before our Constitution based government was created. The Declaration of Independence itself almost never existed, because of religious feuds between conflicting sects from some states. It's difficult to form the "Christian nation" dimwits and frauds (isn't there a Commandment against that?) spout, when there were at least 5 disparate religious and secular competitors back then, and far more in today's larger and vastly diverse society.
He's dead wrong in saying the 1st Amendment fails to attach to commercial speech such as advertising, campaign finance, or hate speech. There are special tests for those, and lesser status for commercial than private speech, as well as sometimes badly drafted law which fails to distinguish hate speech from hate crimes. If the 1st Amendment did not protect hate speech, exterminating rabid Fundie organizations, or broad restrictions on child abuse or fraud by them, could be easily passed, including making this article itself criminal.
|
| Libertarian Is Not Libertine | Feb 26th. at 3:30:41 am EST
|
Shadowbear (Hillsboro, Oregon) - Email Me
Just because Libertarians don't like the idea of the government controlling so much of our lives does not mean that they believe that everyone should be allowed to do whatever they want to - your right to swing your fist still stops at my nose! I am a Libertarian and can't stand the ACLU because they don't seem to understand the constitution at all and do support positions I do not believe fall under the constitution. However, the founding fathers did not believe that the feds should run the whole country - the most government should be at the smallest level so that communities can make the necessary rules so that people can live together - like how to handle 4-way intersections and survive.
People have always found local ways to handle those who disturb others - and shame sure is one of those ways, but with all our laws and regulations, no one tries shame, if it is not illegal it must be supported. A little shame would not hurt.
|
| There's That Binary Opposition Again. | Feb 26th. at 1:24:33 am EST
|
Moonlight Wolf (Bradford, England) - Email Me
This guy obviously is one of these, you do what is traditional, and you are good. Don't do this and you are bad.
He implies that people who oppose marriage also support terrorists.
Not true. Islamic fundamentalists are all for marrage and family. Its an essential part of their religion.
He also says that people who behave in an unashamed way also have no regard for religion.
Whatever religion means nowadays. It could mean church, circle, sport or even clothes.
Get your facts straight mister.
Don't be intolerant. Lose the binary view of the world.
|
| More Dogma | Feb 25th. at 10:39:36 pm EST
|
Ander s. Drake (hays, Kansas) - Email Me
here's the e-mail i sent the guy
Libertarians aren't liberals, libertarians wanted less government in social and economic affairs, it's the opposite of being populist. Liberals want more government in general and conservatives want less government in general.
Stop trying to put the spin on this that Christians are some how treated unfairly. We are a nation with many religions including some you may not like but that does not give the religious right the right to persecute every one who does not accept their dogma. There is no right to be intolerant!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you look up nature rights in American constitution, the French constitution and the UN every body has nature rights. The right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness no where does it say Christians only! The truth is no religions are allowed preferential treatment in the court house, public schools, and in the work place. Stop demanding special rights for Christians and then taking other peoples religions rights away from them using the pretext that they are evil. Sexually is not evil, the human body is not dirty and it's not wrong to have desire or even lust for another human being. It's part of being a man/woman and if other people have different sexually needs then I am not going to judge them or persecute them. We have general laws in place to protect people from the things that all of us agree are crimes like, murder,stealing, child pornography, but not what one religious sect. thinks is wrong because just in Christians religions there are enough different branches who all claim to be right that there world be utter chaos trying to enforce laws that only thirdly percent of the population thinks is right. we would have riots and a civil war on many different fronts it would destroy American. The only way to get what the righteous right wants is to kill all us non-believes and so call nominal Christians or make us slaves are you willing to do that! Commit genocide, enslave us , and general deny every one who refuses to agree with you freedom. The Salem witch trails, the biblical support for slavery of African Americans which sparked the civil war and destroying the native American culture are hardy what I would call a " Christian tradition which cradled our democracy".
Some times the A.C.L.U has gone a little over broad but I'm sure they get tired of dealing with the persecution the religious right forces on innocent people.
|
| Mr. Dictionary, Please | Feb 25th. at 10:07:39 pm EST
|
argilcath (Rapid City, Colorado) - Email Me
This man is an editor, yet does not perceive the difference between "Libertarian" and "libertine"?
This is an op-ed piece, but if it is any indication of his paper's fact checking...
-argilcath
|
| ... | Feb 25th. at 1:52:58 pm EST
|
Draken (Bronx, New York) - Email Me - Web
"Shame is nothing new."
Hey Frank, how's Ted Haggard doing?
|
| Overpaid | Feb 25th. at 1:21:59 pm EST
|
Ahr-Ohn (Bridgeport, Connecticut) - Email Me
"Frank Miele is managing editor of the Daily Inter Lake and writes a weekly column called "Editor's 2 Cents." Write to him at mailto:edit@dailyinterlake.com "
Underworked and Overpaid, and he doesn't know Libertarianism from the ACLU.
"Shame is nothing new.
In the Bible, it is present in man from the beginning, from Genesis, from the time when Adam and Eve discover their nakedness in the Garden of Eden and are ashamed and cover themselves."
Doesn't know his Bible, either. After Woman became seperate, at the Rib, and Shared with Adam, the first of Men, that succulence, the knowledge of which is both Good and Evil, then they knew the Shame of Nakedness, and had to cover their 'good and evil parts.' Children are still innocent in Nakedness, if their hearts are free.
"It is that internal, essentially human, self-consciousness which is the seed of what the philosophers call “natural law,” and thus we can say that individual self-consciousness has an elemental role in mankind’s continuing urge to legislate and to regulate human behavior. In a very real sense, the legal system is society’s way of imposing shame on those who lack an adequate amount of it on their own. "
The basis of Judeo-Christian Law "is to love Divinity, with all your thought and passion, and to love your neighbor, as you love yourself." Libertarians may have an occassional difficulty, in allowing their neighbors to choose their own freedoms, but this can be debated, where discerned.
The real challenge, to the Libertarians, is the challenge of all Civilization. Yo togeather; Ga seperately; but the strength of Civilization tends to overwhelm the alternatives, creating a limiting imballance.
"For Adam and Eve, they see no shame in being naked, and for the rest of us, they see no shame in living as though there were no natural law."
Does this guy want to bounce from his knees?
"You only need to read the latest “Britney Spears enters/exits rehab” story to understand this."
I don't see what a whoosie rehab center has to do with Libertarianism. Why are they letting her in, for less than 24 hours, at that spa? Does Narconon still have that facility, where she could learn a Native American Dialect? [Web LINK]
"This also illustrates the fundamental danger of libertarianism. It believes that the behavior of the individual has no effect on the collective known as society. But that is patently false. Instead, every time society allows vulgar, selfish behavior to go unpunished — unshamed if you will — then it sends a message to everyone that such behavior is acceptable."
This guy also needs a visit to Summerhill, where Homosexuality was condoned, but never happened.
"I am confident that if the Declaration of Independence were written today as an official government document, the ACLU would be in court before the end of the week to demand an injunction against it."
Did King George III ever accept that document? I understand the Supreme Court otUS has also disparaged it.
"The First Amendment has been so twisted by legal interpretation and misinterpretation that it now barely resembles the intent of the Founding Fathers. When they wrote that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” the Founding Fathers had something specific in mind."
Yes, the First Amendment allows Pennsylvania to deify George Fox, and Utah to deify Joseph Smith, and even Connecticut may regard Queen Elizabeth as Pope, but it's been a bit distorted from Justice Hugo Black's interpretation of Incorporation, on the basis of the 14th Amendment.
"These words in the First Amendment were intended as guarantors of our political liberty, and were meant to ensure our rights to speak out against the government, not as cudgels to force the nation to submit to vile and vulgar discourse as the lingua franca of the realm."
I'm sure many in Parliament had considered Patric Henry as Vile and Vulgar, in his speech.
"It is quite apparent that the First Amendment was never intended as an unqualified permit for any and all speech, and as early as 1798 Congress adopted the Alien and Sedition Acts,"
Which were quickly repealed.
"Even today, the First Amendment’s freedom of the press clause, which appears to be an absolute protection, does not in fact apply to such things as child pornography, commercial speech such as advertising, campaign finance, hate speech or slander."
States had their own degree of Sovereignty, and could pass such laws.
"In essence, the court has taken away the right of society to consider certain kinds of behavior and speech to be shameful, and by removing such restrictions, it has left us vulnerable to the acidic corrupting influences of teen-centered popular culture, Internet pornography and filthy lucre."
Most Pornography is consumed by Conservative Housewives, and it took Bowdler to make Shakespeare acceptable to the Masses. What would this idiot have said about the introduction of Phonography, as used by Elvis Presley?
His face is Jewish, but his Literacy is Baptist.
Arawn
|
| I Had To Laugh ! | Feb 25th. at 11:43:39 am EST
|
Libertarian (Langley, Washington) - Email Me - Web
This clown doesn't know what a Libertarian is . I've learned a long time ago not to even try to educate such a person as that . His mind is made up so I won't confuse him with the facts. It's sad really how some folks refuse to accept the free choices of peaceful people. Buy the way a Libertarian is simply a person who holds the philosophy of live and let live.
PAX
|
| A Rather Alarmist View. | Feb 25th. at 10:28:37 am EST
|
bigcat (peoria, Illinois) - Email Me
There are only three laws that are truly natural; the law of survival, the law of the pecking order and the laws of territory-which governs animals across the board, including us. What rules that exist after that, are largely human invention- and are therefore debatable, including shame.
What this author seems to be saying- is that Libertarians are bad because they support such controversial subjects and that all of society is suffering because of this lack of constraint. (In actuality, he is the one of some that are offended.) Society will adjust, and will persevere in the face of changes. We have adjusted to the word "damn" in the movies- and we will adjust to everything else, such as wardrobe malfunctions, nudist camps and same sex marriages. We have before- and will again without self-proclaimed arbiters denouncing both the baby-and the bathwater, whether they are Libertarian-or not.
|
| IF IT HARM NONE.... | Feb 25th. at 9:41:38 am EST
|
Whitewolf (Schenectady, New York) - Email Me
do what ye will....
Love to all
|
| Ye Ol' Values Voters Again | Feb 25th. at 9:26:33 am EST
|
Sabaean (Metairie, Louisiana) - Email Me - Web
Again we’re being subject to the Religious Right’s Values Voter’s debate, replete with half-truths and pseudo-intellectualism. They do this when they are on the outside looking in, when they’re in power, no debate is allowed; only the most draconian views need apply.
I feel no sympathy for this type of whining. We’ve had the “most Christian President in our nation’s history” as they like to claim, violate the Bill of Rights like a dictator of another era. We’ve been “shamed” around the globe as imperial and tyrannical, while these same apocalyptic utopians still control the big nuke’m button.
The writer, Frank Miele is so very concerned over the end of his social values. However, with his messiah in the White House, it very well may be the end of the human race. But, on the up side, Miele won’t have the burden of shame for being a fool.
|
Disclaimer: The Witches' Voice inc does not verify the accuracy of the details stated in this listing, nor do we vouch for the value of the goods or services presented here... As with all contacts and financial dealings in cyberspace, we encourage you to use caution and wisdom in your dealings with strangers.
Political Statements: Any and all personal political opinions expressed in the public listing sections (including, but not restricted to, personals, events, groups, shops, Wren's Nest, etc.) are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinion of The Witches' Voice, Inc. TWV is a non-profit, non-partisan educational organization.
|
State/Country flags created by 3dflags.com and are used with permission
Web Site Content (including: text - graphics - html - look & feel)
Copyright 1997-2009 The Witches' Voice Inc. All rights reserved
Note: Authors & Artists retain the copyright for their work(s) on this website.
Unauthorized reproduction without prior permission is a violation of copyright laws.
Website structure, evolution and php coding by Fritz Jung on a Macintosh G5.
Any and all personal political opinions expressed in the public listing sections (including, but not restricted to, personals, events, groups, shops, Wren’s Nest, etc.) are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinion of The Witches’ Voice, Inc. TWV is a nonprofit, nonpartisan educational organization.
Sponsorship: Visit the Witches' Voice Sponsor Page for info on how you
can help support this Community Resource. Donations ARE Tax Deductible.
The Witches' Voice carries a 501(c)(3) certificate and a Federal Tax ID.
Mail Us: The Witches' Voice Inc., P.O. Box 341018, Tampa, Florida 33694-1018 U.S.A.
| |
