NationStates Jolt Archive

This is an issue that I've noticed, particularly in myself, more and more. Does anyone here feel that people have a certain right to be stupid?

Let me expand with a few personal examples.

I am pro-life and pro-choice. I am pro-life in that I personally would never have an abortion if I were a woman (short of incest and rape), and I would never give someone the advice that it's a good idea to have an abortion. I am pro-choice in the sense that I don't think the government should legislate against abortion because I don't feel right telling people to adopt my morals.

I am opposed to drugs but in favour of more relaxed drug laws. I am opposed to drugs in the sense that I would never do anything like marijuana (or even smoke a cigarette for that matter) and would never give someone the advice that it's a good idea to do drugs. However, I am in favour of more relaxed drug laws because I again don't think the government should legislate that kind of morality.

I am opposed to recreational sex but I'm in favour of letting people express themselves sexually however they want. I am opposed to recreational sex because I personally believe that sex should be with someone you love (it can be premarital) and I wouldn't advise anyone to go out and have lots of promiscuous sex. I'm in favour of letting people express themselves sexually however they want because I don't think it's my business or the government's business to tell people what is right and what is wrong in this case.

Does anyone else have this seeming conflict within them? That is, does anyone else support giving people the right to do things you would never advise them to do?

Not that much of one. I do not respect the right to do anything stupid, stupidity hurts society and should not be allowed. I have a tendency towards totalitarianism and the like so the conflict between personal morality and state morality is not that great. I used to have this issue but my cynicism and misanthropic qualities won.

I believe that people who have abortions should be executed. That should give you an idea of what I think about a lot of things.

This is an issue that I've noticed, particularly in myself, more and more. Does anyone here feel that people have a certain right to be stupid?

Let me expand with a few personal examples.

I am pro-life and pro-choice. I am pro-life in that I personally would never have an abortion if I were a woman (short of incest and rape), and I would never give someone the advice that it's a good idea to have an abortion. I am pro-choice in the sense that I don't think the government should legislate against abortion because I don't feel right telling people to adopt my morals.

I am opposed to drugs but in favour of more relaxed drug laws. I am opposed to drugs in the sense that I would never do anything like marijuana (or even smoke a cigarette for that matter) and would never give someone the advice that it's a good idea to do drugs. However, I am in favour of more relaxed drug laws because I again don't think the government should legislate that kind of morality.

I am opposed to recreational sex but I'm in favour of letting people express themselves sexually however they want. I am opposed to recreational sex because I personally believe that sex should be with someone you love (it can be premarital) and I wouldn't advise anyone to go out and have lots of promiscuous sex. I'm in favour of letting people express themselves sexually however they want because I don't think it's my business or the government's business to tell people what is right and what is wrong in this case.

Does anyone else have this seeming conflict within them? That is, does anyone else support giving people the right to do things you would never advise them to do?


You sir sound like you have a libertarian streak in you… welcome you sound a lot like me:)

I believe that people who have abortions should be executed. That should give you an idea of what I think about a lot of things.
Ahhh those that supposedly hold human life sacrosanct :rolleyes:

This is an issue that I've noticed, particularly in myself, more and more. Does anyone here feel that people have a certain right to be stupid?

Let me expand with a few personal examples.

I am pro-life and pro-choice. I am pro-life in that I personally would never have an abortion if I were a woman (short of incest and rape), and I would never give someone the advice that it's a good idea to have an abortion. I am pro-choice in the sense that I don't think the government should legislate against abortion because I don't feel right telling people to adopt my morals.

I am opposed to drugs but in favour of more relaxed drug laws. I am opposed to drugs in the sense that I would never do anything like marijuana (or even smoke a cigarette for that matter) and would never give someone the advice that it's a good idea to do drugs. However, I am in favour of more relaxed drug laws because I again don't think the government should legislate that kind of morality.

I am opposed to recreational sex but I'm in favour of letting people express themselves sexually however they want. I am opposed to recreational sex because I personally believe that sex should be with someone you love (it can be premarital) and I wouldn't advise anyone to go out and have lots of promiscuous sex. I'm in favour of letting people express themselves sexually however they want because I don't think it's my business or the government's business to tell people what is right and what is wrong in this case.

Does anyone else have this seeming conflict within them? That is, does anyone else support giving people the right to do things you would never advise them to do?

I agree with you on three out of three, so you're definitely not alone. My moral code seems like an excellent one to me, but until I become omniscient and perfect, I don't feel qualified to dictate anyone else's morality.

I agree with you on three out of three, so you're definitely not alone. My moral code seems like an excellent one to me, but until I become omniscient and perfect, I don't feel qualified to dictate anyone else's morality.

But there are times when you have to, like with crimes and serving on a jury. You have to impose an established code of morality to determine that those acts are wrong and should be punished.

Generally, moral relativism only works when the actions involved do not harm others (and in some cases) the person.

Upholding the value of life isnt pushing the morality of one person onto another. If you cant uphold the conviction of your morality no matter who is doing the crime then you are no more then an empty suit. In life some things are a absoulte moral truth no matter who you are.

Upholding the value of life isnt pushing the morality of one person onto another. If you cant uphold the conviction of your morality no matter who is doing the crime then you are no more then an empty suit. In life some things are a absoulte moral truth no matter who you are.

Well, if the person commiting the crime thinks their action is perfectly moral (like the scum who claim they're commanded by God to kill) and just, you are forcing morality on them. You are forcing a judgement on them that it is wrong and deserves punishment, regardless of their own morality.

If there are absolute moral truths, that raises the question of what they are and what their basis is?

Upholding the value of life isnt pushing the morality of one person onto another. If you cant uphold the conviction of your morality no matter who is doing the crime then you are no more then an empty suit. In life some things are a absoulte moral truth no matter who you are.
Oh prove any objective moral truth

Pick one

And prove it is both objective and absolute

Well, if the person commiting the crime thinks their action is perfectly moral (like the scum who claim they're commanded by God to kill) and just, you are forcing morality on them. You are forcing a judgement on them that it is wrong and deserves punishment, regardless of their own morality.

If there are absolute moral truths, that raises the question of what they are and what their basis is?


decapitating someone for your god isnt a absolute truth. the murder of innocents however is.

laws usualy force morality onto people. For example it is usualy illegal to steal or murder.

decapitating someone for your god isnt a absolute truth. the murder of innocents however is.

laws usualy force morality onto people. For example it is usualy illegal to steal or murder.
But that does not make any of them absolute morals it just makes them generally accepted morals

Although I don't always agree that the choices people make are the right one's, I hardly think they're validly criminal offenses.

Crimes that aren't real crimes, definitely create very real criminals.
It may not be a good idea to eat at McDonald's or order pizza from the local joint, but do we really need some government-employed control freaks around to make sure we're not getting fat?

No. So long as you are not performing force or fraud against another citizen, it shouldn't be illegal. Suggestions are fine, but as an adult, I can make my own choices.

But there are times when you have to, like with crimes and serving on a jury. You have to impose an established code of morality to determine that those acts are wrong and should be punished.

Generally, moral relativism only works when the actions involved do not harm others (and in some cases) the person.

Not exactly. You have to impose an established code of law. The vast majority of people (myself included) do think of murder as highly immoral as well as illegal, but what is actually being determined when a suspected murderer is put on trial is whether he broke the law, not whether he's a bad person.

We set rules for our society dictating the illegality of harming others, since harming them violates their rights. Hence why you can get drunk all you like, but you can't get drunk and go for a drive. You are allowed to endanger or harm yourself; you are not allowed to endanger or harm others. I don't really know what you mean by cases where the actions harm only the person committing them - as far as I'm concerned, people have the right to harm themselves. It may be stupid or even immoral by some standards, but if I want to chop my arm off, why would anyone have the right to force me not to?

This is an issue that I've noticed, particularly in myself, more and more. Does anyone here feel that people have a certain right to be stupid?

Let me expand with a few personal examples.

I am pro-life and pro-choice. I am pro-life in that I personally would never have an abortion if I were a woman (short of incest and rape), and I would never give someone the advice that it's a good idea to have an abortion. I am pro-choice in the sense that I don't think the government should legislate against abortion because I don't feel right telling people to adopt my morals.

I am opposed to drugs but in favour of more relaxed drug laws. I am opposed to drugs in the sense that I would never do anything like marijuana (or even smoke a cigarette for that matter) and would never give someone the advice that it's a good idea to do drugs. However, I am in favour of more relaxed drug laws because I again don't think the government should legislate that kind of morality.

I am opposed to recreational sex but I'm in favour of letting people express themselves sexually however they want. I am opposed to recreational sex because I personally believe that sex should be with someone you love (it can be premarital) and I wouldn't advise anyone to go out and have lots of promiscuous sex. I'm in favour of letting people express themselves sexually however they want because I don't think it's my business or the government's business to tell people what is right and what is wrong in this case.

Does anyone else have this seeming conflict within them? That is, does anyone else support giving people the right to do things you would never advise them to do?
i'm with you. its not my place to second guess other people's moral choices. especially for "victimless" things. (or when the only victim is you)

it makes life alot easier if you only have to run your own life.

Not that much of one. I do not respect the right to do anything stupid, stupidity hurts society and should not be allowed. I have a tendency towards totalitarianism and the like so the conflict between personal morality and state morality is not that great. I used to have this issue but my cynicism and misanthropic qualities won.
That makes two of us. I may be a libertarian on the outside, but inside I am an authoritarian.

Man, I knew I should have left the abortion example out. That just gets people riled up and unwilling to read the rest.

As for enforcing a moral code, I agree that there have to be laws, but I believe that things should be illegal only when they cause significant quantifiable damage to society. The fact that you are generally less productive if you do a lot of marijuana is not grounds for banning it, even though in a roundabout way that makes society less productive which harms society overall.

I dont really like the idea of 'society' having too much say in the lives of individuals, after all 'society' is just a really big group of people...I've met people, so I have every reason to believe I am as likely as anyone else to make the right choices for me.