Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 09/21/2012 5:54:08 AM PDT by markomalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: markomalley

> “The civil government has the authority and the obligation
> to enact laws prohibiting abortion, contraception and
> sodomy as these are harmful to the individual as well as
> to society. Government — be it a democratic republic,
> monarchy, and so on — exists for one purpose: to protect
> the common good.”

This is not a good argument, because there is a chasm of difference between “harm to the individual” and “the common good.”

By confusing the two, he places himself in the position of socialists, firmly of the belief that government has the legitimate authority to be a nanny to all citizens, at all times and in places.

Instead, the situation can be parsed to achieve the same ends but without embracing a philosophy of totalitarianism.

To begin with, reject the notion abortion as defined by Roe v. Wade, that it is an individual prerogative, when, outside of abortifacients, drugs that induce abortion that can be self inflicted, abortion requires medical, or pseudo medical complicity.

And government, most certainly, can prohibit medical procedures that cause harm, such as a person with healthy legs wanting them amputated because he has a psychiatric problem. While he might still lay down on railroad tracks, the state does not have to sanction a medical doctor to perform such a surgery.

The next issue, contraception, is really also outside of the government’s purview, because it is indeed an unalienable right to *not* reproduce, even if a people choose to die out instead of have children.

Instead, the real harm comes not from contraception, but from the collapse of socially enforced marriage. That is, from sex outside of marriage, which is a terribly destructive thing. If a married couple cannot have, support or raise children, for them contraception instead of abstinence is acceptable.

And here, the church must accept some mea culpa, for it has long tolerated, if not endorsed, fornication, because it is ubiquitous and would upset the fornicators who still want to call themselves Catholic. So in all fairness, it cannot demand that government do what it will not.

Which of course leaves sodomy. Which, properly defined, includes both homosexual *and* heterosexual sodomy. And since the prosecution of this cannot be achieved without the gross violation of privacy, property, and civil rights, it is not the job of government, either.


2 posted on 09/21/2012 6:56:06 AM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy (DIY Bumper Sticker: "THREE TIMES,/ DEMOCRATS/ REJECTED GOD")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley

common-ist good. Okay.................


3 posted on 09/21/2012 8:33:56 AM PDT by procrustes (You make Free Republic look bad!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson