[Rhodes22-list] Jesusland.

[brad haslett]

Robert,

You are correct.  You wrote:

"Values that are not broadly multicultural, that are
based on a single scriptural and monotheistic base,
have no place in the laws of a secular government."

Allow me to expand on that.  Values that are forced on
the nation by a small number of minor elected
officials and pro-active judiciaries have no place in
a secular government.  We have many issues to face as
a nation that fall under the category of ethics or
moral issues.  When a group, any group supporting any
issue, is allowed to bypass the legislative process to
legalize any issue, we have a dysfunctional
government.

Let's get back to basics.  The Legislature makes laws.
 The Executive branch enforces them.  The Judicial
branch interprets them.  It is really pretty simple.

Brad

--- Robert Skinner <robert at squirrelhaven.com> wrote:

> Hank -
> 
> On checking with modern dictionaries, I note that
> the 
> distinction between the bases of the two terms has 
> become blurred, so you are right on that score.
> 
> Going back to the historical origins of the terms, 
> ethics have their origin in the Greek concepts of
> right 
> action, with little or no reference to deity.  The
> term 
> "morals" is more recently coined, appearing in the
> 15th 
> century AD, generally associated with morality plays
> 
> employed in religious instruction, somewhat like the
> 
> Christian parables.
> 
> Given that the distinction between the two words is 
> currently so minimal in common speech, I will
> restate 
> my position:
> 
> Values that are not broadly multicultural, that are
> based 
> on a single scriptural and monotheistic base, have
> no 
> place in the laws of a secular government.
> 
> /Robert Skinner
>
---------------------------------------------------------------
> Hank wrote:
> > 
> > I have to disagree on your definition of morals
> and ethics.  In most,
> > if not all, dictionaries, morals and ethics are
> synonymous terms and
> > are often used to define one another.  Nether one
> implies a Deity.
> > They both are based upon acting out of a sense of
> right or wrong, good
> > or evil.
> > 
> > Hank
> > 
> > On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:13:36 -0500, Robert Skinner
> > <robert at squirrelhaven.com> wrote:
> > > Rummy -
> > >
> > > Couldn't agree more about the problems that come
> > > up when we combine religion with politics.
> > >
> > > Part of the background of our current "family
> values"
> > > vs. secular considerations may come from our
> failure
> > > to distinguish between moral issues and ethical
> ones.
> > >
> > > Morals are a product of a person's dialogue with
> his
> > > deity of choice - and there is more than one
> such
> > > acknowledged in this country.
> > >
> > > Ethics are shared in a society without regard to
> > > religion - or the society falls apart.  When the
> > > society decides to enforce morals, it becomes a
> > > theocracy, and people's rights are submerged in
> the
> > > regulations laid down by the priest class,
> specially
> > > when it is indistinguishable from the ruling
> class.
> > >
> > > I believe that the "family values" issues raised
> in
> > > the last election are totally irrelevant to our
> > > government, and were used in the most
> unscrupulous
> > > way to obscure the real issues confronting our
> > > government.
> > >
> > > /Robert Skinner
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> www.rhodes22.org/list
> 



		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! 
http://my.yahoo.com