Originally published at www.paganvigil.com/C49491493/E20081225050757
The law and you
It's been a while since I've had time to write a proper opinion piece. Time to fix that I think.
I've talked before about the roots of government power and the difference between mala in se laws and mala prohibita laws.
Mala in se laws address crimes that do measurable damage. Mala prohibita laws exist because someone wanted to make a behavior forbidden.
Mala prohibita mean that the government will impose morality and ethics by force. And as you should know by now, government has lousy ethics and worse morals.
The picture of Lady Liberty kissing Lady Justice above is shocking. Why? Shouldn't two individuals who love each other be able to kiss? Shouldn't two lovers share their passion?
Ah, but it's two ladies.
That shouldn't make a difference. Even though the straight guy in me likes the idea. The only reason it's shocking is because our culture has tried to make it FORBIDDEN.
Watch for that word. It's a sure sign that someone thinks their morality is better than yours. Power over instead of power with.
It's not just sex that gets messed up. No, in the American attempt to impose morality on the rest of the world, we've singlehandedly created countless narco-states.
Overlooking the whole hypocrisy of "allowing" tobacco and alcohol while outlawing countless other substances, let's get down to the money. By making certain drugs that cost pennies to make illegal all over the world, American policy has made those same drugs wildly profitable. Prohibition has made organized crime possible.
Just as it did before.
Morals and ethics imposed by force. FORBIDDEN.
And ultimately failing.
That's the other thing to remember about mala prohibita laws. They never stop the behavior.
You see, social engineering ultimately owes it's existence to mala prohibita laws. We can agree that murder is wrong. We can agree that theft and vandalism is wrong.
But we can't agree on prostitution. We can't agree on gambling. We can't agree on prohibition.
Let's go further. Eminent domain was stretched during the 1960s and 1970s to get rid of "slums." It didn't work, it destroyed existing neighborhoods and neighborhood businesses, and usually produced "projects" that were unsafe and hotbeds of criminal activity.
Power over, all in the public good. Everything "those in charge" don't like will be FORBIDDEN.
Do you recognize a pattern yet?
Let's keep sex offenders from schools, two thousand feet seems like a reasonable distance. Except what makes a sex offender? A rapist, sure, but what about the guy with the manga collection? Do we go after the Victoria's Secret customer? What about if he's a man and wears it himself? Is he still a danger to the women and children in the area? Two thousand feet in a city with parks and schools limits where a labeled sex offender can go. Is that right?
Social engineering means the alternatives are FORBIDDEN.
If Congress passes an auto bailout, it possible that Congress will dictate the cars that can be manufactured. While electric cars sound great and really appeal to the geek in me, they are just not practical. I live in rural Arizona, I don't do it every day but it's not unusual to drive three or four hundred miles a day. I need something I can "gas up" in just a few minutes. Heck, I need something that I can gas up just about anywhere.
But if it's FORBIDDEN to sell or fuel gasoline cars, where does that leave me?
I have a suggestion, it's a bit radical, but it may be the only solution.
Let's make it FORBIDDEN for legislators to pass mala prohibita laws.
But until we can do that, maybe it's time to break a couple here and there.
Posted: Thu - December 25, 2008 at 05:07 AM