American beliefs

[ATM]

Correct. The Founding Fathers had a lot of good ideas, but morality being dependent on religion wasn't one of them.

Interesting. Their predictions on this matter certainly appear to be proving true. What prediction or analysis might you offer to counter or sway the conclusion at this late phase of their experiment? We are still living and observing the results, so don't make stuff up.

Would you claim that the quality of morality as legislated by the state is more or less effective than the morality the colonials claimed was necessary for a people to maintain their freedom?

 

[IndyDave1776]

Correct. The Founding Fathers had a lot of good ideas, but morality being dependent on religion wasn't one of them.

How do you account for the fact that the nation operated much better when this standard was accepted than it does now?

 

[BugI02]

I'm for sticking with trying to get the fed.gov to abide by the constitution we've got rather than change it

^^^^THIS!^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[2A_Tom]

We have reached the tipping point and there is no turning back.

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic."
Benjamin Franklin

Even so come Lord Jesus.

 

[Lowe0]

How do you account for the fact that the nation operated much better when this standard was accepted than it does now?

Did it?

(I had a longer reply typed out for ATM at first, but this just covers it so much more succinctly. Were the good old days really as good as they seem through the lens of nostalgia?)

 

[Lowe0]

noun (plural authorities)

1The power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience:
Definition of fallacy in English:



noun (plural fallacies)

1A mistaken belief, especially one based on unsoundargument:




Constitutional authority is unsound.
thats interesting.
libertarian?
anarchist?

No.

Argument from authority - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Cerberus]

Better at putting together a functioning system of checks and balances, sure. But like Darwin or Einstein, let's not assume that above-average competence in one area means they're automatically right about everything else.

And there you have it. One group actually managed to come up with a pretty good idea, not perfect by any measure, but about as close as can be gotten and have it survive and thrive for over 200 years. The other come up with stuff that a few years down the line come to be accepted as folly. And I will venture forth the notion that our Founders were more right on many issues than Darwin was, after all science puts forth theories, and even now Einstein is starting to be doubted in some of his theories. Science is never settled.

 

[IndyDave1776]

We have reached the tipping point and there is no turning back.

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic."
Benjamin Franklin

Even so come Lord Jesus.

The scene this brings to mind fits well with a prayer history remembers from the church service aboard the Nevada during the Pearl Harbor attack. A young sailor, after having the attack disrupt service, exclaimed the impromptu prayer, "Praise God and pass the ammunition!"

 

[Cerberus]

Did it?

(I had a longer reply typed out for ATM at first, but this just covers it so much more succinctly. Were the good old days really as good as they seem through the lens of nostalgia?)

I'm not ATM, but I will say most assuredly that the answer to your question is "it all depends." In a few minor ways, things are better, but those are mainly along the lines of creature comforts. Was there more individual freedom, yes and we expanded freedom for more and more groups along the way. Now we have youth that shun morals, have rampant apathy, enslaved by their indoctrination, all the while we are tearing ourselves apart over stuff that is unimportant. A painful correction is coming and most lack the intestinal fortitude to do the right thing.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Did it?

(I had a longer reply typed out for ATM at first, but this just covers it so much more succinctly. Were the good old days really as good as they seem through the lens of nostalgia?)

I would say that nostalgia is always a danger when evaluating history--and one that as a history major my professors saw to it that I understood. When I make this reference, it isn't a reference to a time when people were friendlier, life was slower, and contentment was universal (fiction, for the most part), but there is no question that crime was less prevalent, honor and the value of one's word were more prevalent (due in no small part to the fact that few people were anonymous and generally were not trusted until they ceased to be anonymous, but also due in part to the moral atmosphere of the time), and perhaps most important, if a person managed to follow the Ten Commandments and pay his taxes, he most likely could spend his entire life without having any official contact with the law.

I am inclined to believe that the quality of the society of 200 years ago was in most ways superior to that of today. In part, I would base this on the length of time it took before the phrase, "We need a law..." became prevalent. You don't need a law when people are self-governing.

To approach this from a different angle, we generally think of anarchy as chaos which is not necessarily true. It can be, and in today's culture, it most likely would be. The basic problem with the Articles of Confederation was that they bordered on anarchy to the point that the national government could not operate. You will notice that this did not result in chaos in the absence of a long list of alphabet soup agencies to regulate most every aspect of everyone's lives.

I will rest on the notion that the nation did indeed operate much better then than now by virtue of having as much or more order than we now have with very little manifestation of government to be found compared with what we now have. If people could have a more tranquil society without having it forced upon them, the only viable explanation is that we must have had better and more self-governing people then.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I'm not ATM, but I will say most assuredly that the answer to your question is "it all depends." In a few minor ways, things are better, but those are mainly along the lines of creature comforts. Was there more individual freedom, yes and we expanded freedom for more and more groups along the way. Now we have youth that shun morals, have rampant apathy, enslaved by their indoctrination, all the while we are tearing ourselves apart over stuff that is unimportant. A painful correction is coming and most lack the intestinal fortitude to do the right thing.

I admire your gift for concise, high-density truth (where I expended at least three times the text to address the same point).

 

[MisterChester]

I'm not ATM, but I will say most assuredly that the answer to your question is "it all depends." In a few minor ways, things are better, but those are mainly along the lines of creature comforts. Was there more individual freedom, yes and we expanded freedom for more and more groups along the way. Now we have youth that shun morals, have rampant apathy, enslaved by their indoctrination, all the while we are tearing ourselves apart over stuff that is unimportant. A painful correction is coming and most lack the intestinal fortitude to do the right thing.

Man, younger people can't catch a break on INGO. Thought it would subside when grumpy grandpa Trooper got banned.

 

[Cerberus]

Man, younger people can't catch a break on INGO. Thought it would subside when grumpy grandpa Trooper got banned.

It's called paying your dues. You should have had to deal with blunt grumpy grandpa WW2 vets. Those guys make me look quite tactful. Any one of them would come up and put a boot in your backside and make your parents thank them for it.

 

[Lowe0]

I'm not ATM, but I will say most assuredly that the answer to your question is "it all depends." In a few minor ways, things are better, but those are mainly along the lines of creature comforts. Was there more individual freedom, yes and we expanded freedom for more and more groups along the way. Now we have youth that shun morals, have rampant apathy, enslaved by their indoctrination, all the while we are tearing ourselves apart over stuff that is unimportant. A painful correction is coming and most lack the intestinal fortitude to do the right thing.

Just saying that the youth of today shun morals doesn't actually make it so.

 

[Lowe0]

I would say that nostalgia is always a danger when evaluating history--and one that as a history major my professors saw to it that I understood. When I make this reference, it isn't a reference to a time when people were friendlier, life was slower, and contentment was universal (fiction, for the most part), but there is no question that crime was less prevalent, honor and the value of one's word were more prevalent (due in no small part to the fact that few people were anonymous and generally were not trusted until they ceased to be anonymous, but also due in part to the moral atmosphere of the time), and perhaps most important, if a person managed to follow the Ten Commandments and pay his taxes, he most likely could spend his entire life without having any official contact with the law.

Right off the top, the Alien and Sedition acts. It's been a long time since I opened a Bible, but I don't remember anything about not publishing anything uncomplimentary about John Adams. Part of those acts was eventually used to justify the Japanese internment during WWII, but unless they converted to Christianity, they were violating the Ten Commandments, so I guess that's okay by the standard you set.

 

[MisterChester]

It's called paying your dues. You should have had to deal with blunt grumpy grandpa WW2 vets. Those guys make me look quite tactful. Any one of them would come up and put a boot in your backside and make your parents thank them for it.

If I had a dollar for every 40+ year old telling me my generation sucks I'd have enough money to buy a house and retire in the economy they ruined.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

If I had a dollar for every 40+ year old telling me my generation sucks I'd have enough money to buy a house and retire in the economy they ruined.

But your generation does suck. Mine does, too. I don't even know how old you are and I'm pretty sure all of our generations suck in their own special way.

But I know, for sure, my generation REALLY sucks. I loathe my peers.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Right off the top, the Alien and Sedition acts. It's been a long time since I opened a Bible, but I don't remember anything about not publishing anything uncomplimentary about John Adams. Part of those acts was eventually used to justify the Japanese internment during WWII, but unless they converted to Christianity, they were violating the Ten Commandments, so I guess that's okay by the standard you set.

You are right. Malfeasance was invented this century. Human nature didn't appear 20 years ago. The difference is that the Alien and Sedition acts were thrown on the trash heap of history, not renewed and then pushed for a second renewal like the grossly misnamed Patriot Act.

I was not suggesting that the Ten Commandments did or should constitute the law of government. My point was that anyone doing those things would accidentally avoid legal trouble without even knowing the law. That cannot be said today.

 

[Lowe0]

You are right. Malfeasance was invented this century. Human nature didn't appear 20 years ago. The difference is that the Alien and Sedition acts were thrown on the trash heap of history, not renewed and then pushed for a second renewal like the grossly misnamed Patriot Act.

I was not suggesting that the Ten Commandments did or should constitute the law of government. My point was that anyone doing those things would accidentally avoid legal trouble without even knowing the law. That cannot be said today.

We're a lot more densely populated than we were back then. We also knew a lot less about infectious disease, pollution, etc.. As we learned more about negative externalities of one another's behavior, and as the population grew, it was inevitable that we'd need some rules that went beyond don't steal, don't kill, and don't rape.

 

[ATM]

We're a lot more densely populated than we were back then. We also knew a lot less about infectious disease, pollution, etc.. As we learned more about negative externalities of one another's behavior, and as the population grew, it was inevitable that we'd need some rules that went beyond don't steal, don't kill, and don't rape.

If only we had held our own government accountable to not violate those.

I'm still not even sure how we delegated those three powers which none of us possess.