People who ban things are nazis.

[Shlomo]

newman, you do have a point. Just for argument's sake I will say that the Sages state than even if a man doesn't commit a sin (or does a mitzva) for the wrong reasons, that eventually he may not make such a mistake for the right reasons. Remember that most sin hurts others.

Also, adultery is illegal already and can cause someone to lose their children in a divorce case.

[newman]

newman, you do have a point. Just for argument's sake I will say that the Sages state than even if a man doesn't commit a sin (or does a mitzva) for the wrong reasons, that eventually he may not make such a mistake for the right reasons. Remember that most sin hurts others.

Also, adultery is illegal already and can cause someone to lose their children in a divorce case.

Adultery is not illegal. It may effect custody but so may heavy drinking or unemployment.

Prostitution itself is not illegal, either. 'Solicitation' and running 'bawdy houses' are. This is because government have no right to interfere with personal congress btween consenting adults. They can only legislate with regard to public activity.

Remember also that sins are different to crimes hence the two different words averah and chet.

The slippery slope here is that when a government may regulate an aspect of somebody's personal life which has no effect on other people there is nothing to stop them applying it to ALL aspects.

Do you want government deciding how many layers of clothing you wear in winter? Not rugging up will cause pneumonia and death. If a sane, law-abiding human being must be told by government what to imbibe, then surely he must be told what to wear in a given season too.

[Shlomo]

Prostitution and adultery is illegal here in the U.S., although adultery is rarely ever prosecuted.

[newman]

Prostitution and adultery is illegal here in the U.S., although adultery is rarely ever prosecuted.

The act of solicitation is illegal, not the sex itself. There are wealthy business men who keep mistresses in luxury apartments and pay them an allowance of several thousand dollars per month. This is prostitution but it is not illegal. Talking prices on the street corner is what prostitutes get busted for.

Back to my original point.

Governments legislating against sins (as opposed to crimes) is unworkable, expensive and immoral in itself. So-called conservatives who try and legislate against sin are as rediculous as liberals who try and legislate against human stupidity.

[Shlomo]

King David legislated morality and not only was it effective, but he was the greatest King Israel ever had.

[newman]

King David legislated morality and not only was it effective, but he was the greatest King Israel ever had.

The nation of priests with it's divine election and 613 laws has a several fold higher standard than the nations do. Must gentiles observe kashrut, ritual bathing, the Sabbath etc as well? If Biblical Israel is the standard for the nations then the whole notion of a nation of priest becomes redundant. Replacement theology by stealth.

The only reqirement of the goyim is to adhere to the seven laws of Noach. That does not entail banning the eskimos from eating blubber just because it MAY cause heart  disease or stopping American indians (or westerners) from smoking because it MAY shorten life by 4.2 years.

[Shlomo]

lol

I'm not sure what you mean by replacement theology. I was referring to the Jewish people. I don't think about Noahide laws very often but the gentile governments should enforce Noahide laws and ban where applicable (i.e. like not eating meat cut from living animals).

As for banning something like not eating blubber, I agree.

[newman]

lol

I'm not sure what you mean by replacement theology. I was referring to the Jewish people. I don't think about Noahide laws very often but the gentile governments should enforce Noahide laws and ban where applicable (i.e. like not eating meat cut from living animals).

As for banning something like not eating blubber, I agree.

That's my point.

Smoking, drinking, eating unhealthy foods may be unwise, foolish, silly,whatever, but NOBODY has the right to ban them.

As conservatives we believe in personal freedom. The only time we tollerate restrictions on individuals is when the personal safety or property of others is threatened without their consent. Or when our cultural well may be polluted (do it from the chandeleer at home but not in the park). We accept peoples right to own home defense guns but legislate against firing them at the shopping mall. We accept peoples right to eat pork BBQ 7 days a week but legislate for food labeling and fund health awareness.

Sometimes it's hard to sit back while a minority of people make 'unwise' decisions but the alternative is to take the leftist approach and believe that people are evolved, from nothing, into needy, helpless, stupid creatures that must have a large government, a ruling, cultural elite, take care of them and run their lives for them for their own good.

It's Ronald Regan or Nancy Pelosi. There's no middle ground. Choose.

[Shlomo]

This is a good debate.

I am personal not fond of either Ronald Regan or Nancy Pelosi though Regan was a MUCH better politician. I would like to see more righteous leaders and not those that use horoscopes to predict the future.

I am also much more in favor of those that support Israel.