| Topic: |
Science > Philosophy |
| User: |
"John Q Publique" |
| Date: |
16 Sep 2004 10:51:26 AM |
| Object: |
Are Laws Simply Codified Opinions And Neuroses? |
Whats up with all of the laws and rules? Do we really need this many
laws and rules? It seems to me that the more laws and rules that we
have-the less freedom that we all have. In actuality-there are very few
rules or laws about which all of us can get behind. In most cases-laws
are just neurotic control freaks trying to get us to conform to their
subjective-and therefore meaningless- views of the world. Do most people
really want the kind of paternalistcally and religiously based laws that
we have on the books today? What say you?
.
|
|
| User: "Immortalist" |
|
| Title: Re: Are Laws Simply Codified Opinions And Neuroses? |
16 Sep 2004 12:32:06 PM |
|
|
"John Q Publique" <etherealdog@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:4019-4149B67E-160@storefull-3138.bay.webtv.net...
Whats up with all of the laws and rules? Do we really need this many
laws and rules? It seems to me that the more laws and rules that we
have-the less freedom that we all have. In actuality-there are very few
rules or laws about which all of us can get behind. In most cases-laws
are just neurotic control freaks trying to get us to conform to their
subjective-and therefore meaningless- views of the world. Do most people
really want the kind of paternalistcally and religiously based laws that
we have on the books today? What say you?
Actually it is not "inversely proportional" that the more laws there are the less
freedom there is. Normally laws restrain the government from interfering with
individual rights and these kinds of laws increase freedom. Laws create a matrix
of highways and biways that people can function safely within.
For instance Russia is increasing their laws and becoming more autocratic in an
attempt to be like China which has been on the right path. China has nearly
succeeded in creating a system of laws that are making it safe for free
enterprise or capitalism to work and soon they will begin turning their system
into a true liberal democrat system in the proper fashion. Russia moved to
Democracy to fast and must step back and make a "rule of law" that creates a safe
environment for capital and a hazardous environment for anarchaic capital in the
form of organized crime.
Russia's move back "towards" autocracy only would appear bad to Eurocentric and
Americentric viewpoints.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Are Laws Simply Codified Opinions And Neuroses? |
16 Sep 2004 12:52:21 PM |
|
|
i studied the philosophy of law a little in undergrad school, senior polisci
course
look-up the so-called legal positivist HANS KELSEN, an austrian jew who
survived wwII, and ended-up eventually at the berkeley campus philosophy dept
i enjoyed studying his apparently still influential in europe theory(ies) about
basic fiction normative:
legal norms
moral norms
religious norms
not that i ever completely comprehended him, but he is certainly "insightful"
enough for me to think of him as a worthwhile "philosopher"
if ya do look him up (and or already know of him), please tell if you regard
him as a worthwhile "law philosopher," and do you essenrtially agree with his
"legal positivism" theory et cetera, why/why not
the apparent major controversy: he doesn't buy "natural law"
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "YellowToeNail" |
|
| Title: Re: Are Laws Simply Codified Opinions And Neuroses? |
16 Sep 2004 03:11:32 PM |
|
|
"John Q Publique" <etherealdog@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:4019-4149B67E-160@storefull-3138.bay.webtv.net...
Whats up with all of the laws and rules? Do we really need this many
laws and rules? It seems to me that the more laws and rules that we
have-the less freedom that we all have. In actuality-there are very few
rules or laws about which all of us can get behind. In most cases-laws
are just neurotic control freaks trying to get us to conform to their
subjective-and therefore meaningless- views of the world. Do most people
really want the kind of paternalistcally and religiously based laws that
we have on the books today? What say you?
Curiously, conservatives, who trumpet individual freedom, are
more likely to support laws that restrict freedom. Police power,
restrictions of privacy, and individual choice, are constant targets of
their lawmaking attempts. It's probably due to fundy religion
and robber barons, exerting thought and economic control
over the huddled masses.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Immortalist" |
|
| Title: Re: Are Laws Simply Codified Opinions And Neuroses? |
16 Sep 2004 10:29:39 PM |
|
|
"YellowToeNail" <oing@spur.uk> wrote in message
news:POqdnX9NFKnlbtTcRVn-hQ@comcast.com...
"John Q Publique" <etherealdog@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:4019-4149B67E-160@storefull-3138.bay.webtv.net...
Whats up with all of the laws and rules? Do we really need this many
laws and rules? It seems to me that the more laws and rules that we
have-the less freedom that we all have. In actuality-there are very few
rules or laws about which all of us can get behind. In most cases-laws
are just neurotic control freaks trying to get us to conform to their
subjective-and therefore meaningless- views of the world. Do most people
really want the kind of paternalistcally and religiously based laws that
we have on the books today? What say you?
Curiously, conservatives, who trumpet individual freedom, are
more likely to support laws that restrict freedom. Police power,
restrictions of privacy, and individual choice, are constant targets of
their lawmaking attempts. It's probably due to fundy religion
and robber barons, exerting thought and economic control
over the huddled masses.
This is an incorrect view of lawmaking. Laws are adjustable and differing
situations require different adjustments. Republicans don't want to just restrict
freedom and Democrats don't want to just alow anything freely. Both parties have
similar views about how to adjust the dynamic.
.
|
|
|
| User: "YellowToeNail" |
|
| Title: Re: Are Laws Simply Codified Opinions And Neuroses? |
17 Sep 2004 12:16:42 AM |
|
|
"Immortalist" <Reanimater_2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:_PCdnbD7yIc9x9fcRVn-jw@comcast.com...
"YellowToeNail" <oing@spur.uk> wrote in message
news:POqdnX9NFKnlbtTcRVn-hQ@comcast.com...
"John Q Publique" <etherealdog@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:4019-4149B67E-160@storefull-3138.bay.webtv.net...
Whats up with all of the laws and rules? Do we really need this many
laws and rules? It seems to me that the more laws and rules that we
have-the less freedom that we all have. In actuality-there are very few
rules or laws about which all of us can get behind. In most cases-laws
are just neurotic control freaks trying to get us to conform to their
subjective-and therefore meaningless- views of the world. Do most
people
really want the kind of paternalistcally and religiously based laws
that
we have on the books today? What say you?
Curiously, conservatives, who trumpet individual freedom, are
more likely to support laws that restrict freedom. Police power,
restrictions of privacy, and individual choice, are constant targets of
their lawmaking attempts. It's probably due to fundy religion
and robber barons, exerting thought and economic control
over the huddled masses.
This is an incorrect view of lawmaking. Laws are adjustable and differing
situations require different adjustments. Republicans don't want to just
restrict
freedom and Democrats don't want to just alow anything freely. Both
parties have
similar views about how to adjust the dynamic.
The bitten dog howls, Repug.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
