Marion Square Sunbathing Burns Up Councilman

Not a game MHGinTN. I will try to lay out my complete thoughts on the issue while avoiding inflamatory comments. I hope you can understand where I am coming from and that this changes your thoughts about my character.

I've simply tried to view this, and some of the responses, from a bigger picture perspective. I have been trying to suggest that there are more important matters to get up in arms about. See post #46 from Big Steve. I think his thoughts with respect to the seriousness of the problem is more appropriate and his reaction demonstrates a balanced level of gravity with regards to the situation.

Both of our positions (with Dixie on your side of the fence) share a similar flaw. It is impossible to identify the approriate extreme to which we will allow our position to go before we admit there is a problem with it. While I point out that the slope on your approach can lead to Burkhas and Public Executions, I have to admit that the slope on my view can lead to society becoming completely unglued and morally bankrupt.

I honestly don't know how to reconcile this. I'm conflicted in that a libertarian philosophical approach seems the best way to protect us from the PC crowd itself, but it allows those things that I personally feel are bad for individuals or society as a whole. This is why I bristle when I am accused of wanting the very things I don't personally approve of, yet still question using too much government to control them.

I hope you can understand this.

Big Steve's suggestion regarding what to do about the problem is more reasonable, from my perspective. I personally don't like using police, courts and other valuable resources to satisfy specific individuals when other, more serious affronts to a decent, civilized society are taking place.

People can reason with one another and society can pressure its members to do the right thing. This never leads to perfection, because everybody has different ideas of what perfection would be. Some societies employ morality police to achieve the level of "decency" that dictatorial rulers and their lynch mobs deem appropriate. I don't want us to become Afghanistan, or even Singapore, in terms of imposing too much rule from the top. Unfortunately, my argument is a slippery slope argument which may seem invalid when one remains focused on a specific narrow issue.

I prefer to deal with things I don't like in a less aggressive fashion, avoiding the use of "law" if you will, in order to preserve our freedom. I fear that one day, I may not care for those things deemed appropriate by a different set of rulers and that those rulers may restrict my ability to engage in those things that I do deem appropriate, like going to church, praying, raising my kids in a particular way, etc.

I guess that I fear Hillary's village more than I fear sunbathers at this particular point in time.

You have laid out a very good argument about the need for responsible citizenship instead of censorship. Instead of passing more laws, let an organization or a school be made aware of certain situations and see if they can handle it in a reasonable manner. I don't like new laws being passed because I do fear government intrusion, but I do believe some citizens do need to be made aware of their behavior in public because it may not reflect well on the institutions they claim to represent. It could lead to moral chaos. While I may have led some posters here to believe I support students' rights to wear bathing suits, I don't. I just don't like governement always involved. We don't need censorship, we need citizenship. I don't want a Taliban or Singapore view of society, but I do think citizens need to act more responsibilty behaviorwise in all aspects. Thanks for your input.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.