I wrote this in relation to the UK, but seeing as it's an issue in the US too you can all still comment and give your opinions.
Give your opinions on the issue and on the document itself. Please make all criticism constructive. Regardless of your stance in this debate, be respectful to others. Feel free to challenge their viewpoints but in a gentlemanly way AND BE KIND.
I know there'll be a few mistakes here and there so I'll do my best to fix 'em.
The laws are not what lawyers do. The laws are the masters of the people. They are political; in fact, they are the city. Policemen & politicians just deal with the most obvious part.
Love is defined by the laws. When he says love is individual, he merely says people are slaves to accidents or nature or both. Do you choose who you love?
The laws cannot create or recreate nature, but they do have some power over accidents & they teach people how to live their lives. That's why Americans are democrats. Those fundamental laws are there even for children.
Otherwise, there should be all sorts of opinions about justice, not just love, in America--such that individualism or whatever groups would show up. In reality, if you ask Americans to explain in their way why it is a just regime to have a king, or whatever other regime, they have no idea.
Can you clarify the last paragraph for me? Are you saying all Americans have one homogenous opinion of justice, or none at all, or both? Or that these different factions are effectively homogenized via the law?
An open-ended question for Titus. Gutsy move.
If it is less than 7 paragraphs, I owe you a coke
He's not in your league, Shields. Three, I figure, is enough, & too much. Anyway, why bet JB? He ain't a drinker...
I'm saying that Americans, simply by growing up in America, are completely incompetent about explaining the claim to justice of any regime except democracy. & I mean American democracy--I'm also adding that Americans, simplying by growing up in America, do not understand that American & democratic mean different things. You can ask around, if you happen to be interested in learning about politics, what people think about the claim to justice of any regime you know & which is not a democracy, if you know any. Let me know if anyone comes up with a reasonable answer, especially if it's anything that strikes you as in need of clarification.
There's a reason a college education is necessary to acquaint Americans with other political regimes; there's a reason all Americans have always learned from non-Americans about that; my studies suggest the effort is mostly wasted in these latter days. I believe it is necessary for a variety of reasons--you need people competent in foreign policy, you need people competent in international business settings, you need people who are aware of the limits of democracy, as of the modernity of modern democracy in education, even in politics... I believe it used to be somewhat easier to accomplish, this kind of learning, but over the last several generations, it's becoming increasingly difficult.
If you want to work your way to the significant fact from the consequences, look up people who think Americans are unusually incompetent in foreign policy, which involves, & certainly used to involve, dealing with other kinds of regimes.
None to few. OK.
I think we're saying the same thing about marriage in one sense. It creates a legally binding contract between a man and a woman (or women in other times & cultures) that carries with it social & cultural expectations. And yes, I agree that protecting women and children is one reason for the creation of the institution.
As for legislating love, I was talking about the basic, raw emotion. That is very much beyond the control of any government. Could a piece of legislation make homosexuality illegal? Certainly. The Russians just did it. But that is not going to stop Russian men from falling in love with each other. It might encourage them to conceal their relationships and/or their orientations, but it won't stop them from loving who they love.
We see eye-to-eye on most of this. Always glad to see you make an appearance around here.
Claire Huxtable. Heh.
Thanks, Jack. I wish I could spend more time here at AoM. There's lots of good writing here, and interesting commentary.
Well stated and a good, interesting read. Thanks!
Damn you Milo and your reasonable and intelligent contributions. Here I was enjoying my sense of moral outrage and schadenfreude and Siscos' almost prodigy level ability to make an absolute ass of himself and you freakin ruined everything.