@eladar saidSo limits to ....
A liberal who admits to only allowing certain freedoms. That is refreshing.
A woman's freedom of control over her reproductive systems or ....
A person's freedom over who they can marry or .....
Any person's freedom over who they can go home with (and hop in the sack with) ....
.... don't enter into this debate ??
@mghrn55 saidThe woman's right to reproduction end where the living being with a heartbeat begins.
So limits to ....
A woman's freedom of control over her reproductive systems or ....
A person's freedom over who they can marry or .....
Any person's freedom over who they can go home with (and hop in the sack with) ....
.... don't enter into this debate ??
As far as I know you are correct about government certified marriages. A person is limited to one person to marry and that person must be of an appropriate age.
As for your sex reference once again that is limited by age, but I believe that is about the only limit on legal concentual sex. In Nevada it is legal to trade money for sex.
I really do not see your point, other than to point out that what is legal is not always moral. Nice to see you agree with me on this.
@vivify saidThis is what I mean when I say the libs will win in the end. They can already get the government to fly pride flags. Soon, the govt will grovel at their feet. They will be able to get the government to do anything they want. Like, Universal Income, free healthcare and auto insurance, and dinners out, all kinds of good stuff.
I wasn't aware this happened. Where?
What's not to like?
@averagejoe1 saidPoliticians already give themselves free dinners. I would not be surprised if they give themselves free auto insurance.
This is what I mean when I say the libs will win in the end. They can already get the government to fly pride flags. Soon, the govt will grovel at their feet. They will be able to get the government to do anything they want. Like, Universal Income, free healthcare and auto insurance, and dinners out, all kinds of good stuff.
What's not to like?
@eladar saidFor kripes sake, these arrogant ones have a taxpayer paid for fund to give congressional
Politicians already give themselves free dinners. I would not be surprised if they give themselves free auto insurance.
perpetrators of sexual crimes the funding to pay for lawyers and court suit losses.
@eladar saidI thoroughly believe that religion should be taught in schools. All religions. They’re lart of the world’s cultures, serve as cornerstones of civilization and many holidays are tied to them.
You think there needs to be sex eduction beyond if you are going to have sex and you do not want children use protection?
Who to have sex with and when to have sex is a moral issue. I was never taught the kind of stuff in my sex ed in school that you describe. What you describe is neither needed nor useful.
Everytime there is gay flag flown, someone is shoving homosexu ...[text shortened]... on's throat. It is no different than walking around with a Bible and thumping it in people's faces.
In this context, atheism should be taught as well. And the historical context of religion, etc.
And the same with biology and sex education. Everything from every angle.
And I also believe teenagers should be taught about birth control, how to use condoms, what various religions say about abortion, what forms of sex there are and taught to discuss the morality and lines of where consent ends and abuse starts.
That is education.
As for a gay flag. That’s showing soldarity. Or, do you think a government shouldn’t fly a country’s flag either? Isn’t that a moral issue?
1 edit
@shavixmir
You are welcome to your opinion.
As for the flag, no I do not believe a government should show favortism to one group.
@eladar saidWhat is the role of government, according to you?
@shavixmir
You are welcome to your opinion.
As for the flag, no I do not believe a government should show favortism to one group.
@eladar saidBut there is nothing wrong or immoral in such acts. Here you go again trying to FORCE your Abrahamic moral codex onto your fellow citizens who may or may not share your believes.
I am not condemning. I say let homosexuality be legal. It is fine with me.
I am fine with all sorts of sexual relationships which have been looked down upon. It is called freedom.
I am just saying do not take that extra step and try to tell people that there is nothing wrong or immoral with people who do such things. That extra step is teaching morality, which a government should never do.
It’s because of some clergy and some politicians and some right wing propagandists that schools and wider libertarian society has to redress the balance in order to make it clear that there is objectively speaking nothing immoral about homosexuality.
@earl-of-trumps saidNo of course there isn’t, but the fact that some people are determined to interpret acceptance as idol worship isn’t the homosexuals problem is it.
@kevcvs57 - said
and wider libertarian society has to redress the balance in order to make it clear that there is objectively speaking nothing immoral about homosexuality.
There is nothing heroic about it either.
@kevcvs57 saidYou are welcome to your opinion about what is moral and what is wrong. Just do not force it on others. The state should not be preaching what is immoral and what is not immoral, but you are free to "Bible thump" if you like.
But there is nothing wrong or immoral in such acts. Here you go again trying to FORCE your Abrahamic moral codex onto your fellow citizens who may or may not share your believes.
It’s because of some clergy and some politicians and some right wing propagandists that schools and wider libertarian society has to redress the balance in order to make it clear that there is objectively speaking nothing immoral about homosexuality.
@shavixmir saidThe role of government?
What is the role of government, according to you?
Establish laws by which society functions. (determine what is legal)
Defend the nation's borders.
Provide for Infrustructure.