My sense is that the critics of the Religious Right would very rarely levy the same charges at the Religious Left. Rather, they'd acknowledge that religious people are entitled to try to enact their moral views (which stem from their religious views) into law, just as secular people are entitled to try to enact their moral views (which stem from their secular, but generally equally unprovable, moral axioms) into law.Mmmmhmmm.
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
Imposing One's Faith?
Eugene Volokh has a good argument on the validity of the argument that you can't impose one's religious dogma. Money quote:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I agree with Volokh's point that many secular beliefs are rooted in nothing more solid than what a person feels is right, as can also be the case with "religious" beliefs. However, before the relativism gets too deep, it is important to remember that on some things we are right and they are wrong. Given that the point of having laws is to allow for a prosperous and stable society, we can show that many ideas on the left are wrong either through observation and history or through logic starting from the above goal. If liberals want to take half my income and give it to a welfare moma, that is a bad idea. It is not a bad idea just based on some feeling of mine, it is a bad idea because it destabilizes society. Since we are discussing whether a proposed law is good or bad, then it is rational to start the thread of logic at the reason for having laws. Nothing unprovable needed.
Post a Comment