The government's role

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jerok
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
What are God’s laws, aside from the 10 Commandments?
I’m happy for your return. (I am an avid mass goer, but until I returned to the Traditional mass of my 50’s, boy did that bring back memories. I was blown away. The Church’s latin choirs can hold us avid music lovers spellbound if we’re not careful. :D)

If the government were to return to the advice of the Church, it would have at it’s disposal the vast store that forms the deposit of the faith. These are the works of the great Doctors, the catechism, the works and examples of the saints, and the encyclicals from the Holy Father.

It has in it’s store works of authors of our time offering guidance to governments. For instance my favorite, Kenneth R. Overberg S.J.'s book Conscience in Conflict, he speaks of proper application of the common good for governments as well as individual discernment methods.

Which government would not prefer Christ’s magisterial representative as arbitrator for discussions between governments?. In fact I can’t see why some of the decision making could not be parted out to the Vatican who has the world’s best interest at heart. Who else can offer such impartiality?
 
Should we start laying off policeman because the “War on Robbery” has obviously failed?
Peace,
Ed
There is a critical difference. With robbery there is a complaining victim.

Have you went to www.leap.cc yet? Check out the promo video done by a former Narcotics Undercover Officer of 20 years, a former police chief, etc… Please go to that site then click on ‘Watch a video’ in the upper left corner. Then click on the main video on the left side of the page. Then please come back here and explain to me what part of what they are saying is false.

Do you believe it’s OK to believe that a certain behavior is wrong, and be against that behavior, but not think that it has to be ‘illegal’?
 
Ed,
I am against the use of marijuana and other drugs. IMO (spent a decade as a drug and alcohol counselor) people who use drugs do so because they are sick in some way. A sickness of the soul one might say. Mental/emotional/social problems/disfunction, etc.

I am obviously all for treatment.

Let me ask you this. If you had a child, and discovered that your child was using marijuana or some other drug, would you… plant some drugs in your childs car and then make arrangements so that the cops could catch your child with the drugs as your plan to intervene in efforts to help your child? Or would you take some other type of approach?

And as far as legalization goes, do you and your friends stop by the liquor store in the morning before work and buy liquor and drink it because it’s ‘legal’? What about glue and other solvents that some kids sniff? Why is THAT type of drug use not much more prevalent than marijuana use? After all, it’s legal, right? Therefore the legality of it must draw people who otherwise would avoid it to use it, huh? If crack were legalized tomorrow would you go out and use it? Is it being illegal the factor that keeps you from smoking crack and becoming a crack addict?

There is actual evidence that crime drops when drugs are made available legally to citizens. I think Switzerland is one of the countries on the forefront in this regard. They supply heroin to heroin addicts. And you know what? Instead of the heroin addict, that was already a heroin addict, spending their day begging for money or doing petty crimes, neglecting their most basic health such as eating meals…they take their heroin and then go about their day. And since they are not judged by the providers they, over time, begin to open up to them and engage in treatment related discussions. They get jobs and start to live better, more productive, safer lives and are significantly less likely to put others in harms way. No sharng of dirty needles as the heroin and needles are freely available in the clinics. No robbing people.

Heroin addicts and other hard drug addicts (drugs where daily addictions can run into the hundreds of dollars/day) don’t start out as criminals, like EVER. What happens is they try it. They like it. They spend their money on it. Eventually they turn to their credit and run through that. Then they borrow from family and friends until those wells run dry. Then some of them at some point eventually turn to either selling it to pay for their habbit or to robbing people to pay for their habbit (unless they make a couple grand/day or more, then they just use and and can function at work so long as they don’t use too much of it, and do so for decades, in basically any profession).

Since people are risking life in prison or their lives re: since it’s illegal and no cops are going to be called dealers are very high level targets for armed robbers, you often don’t read about these crimes but if you even meet a professional armed robber ask them who their preferred victims are: banks where you have the FBI chasing you, funded with millions of dollars and basically everyone in the world willing to help with the investigation OR drug dealers… who so long as you get the drop on them and they don’t know who you are…you are off scott free, NO investigation. No cops, no FBI. And the dealers know this so they are armed to the teeth and hyper vigilant re: protecting their product/life.

Not to mention all the dead cops, fatherless children of cops, innocent people caught in the crossfire, etc, etc… all because of drug prohibition. Prisons filled to max capacity, once someone is convicted once…well they are a felon. Good luck getting a job when you get out of jail. No sir. Some try. Few succeed. But the drug underworld does not discriminate against felons so back to the criminal underworld they go…

And when these drug users get out of jail do the police welcome them with open arms, invite them to their softball games, trying to acutally HELP them fill whatever void is in their soul they tried to fill with drugs by offering them other alternatives? No. They just wait around and sniff around to put them back in jail.

I’d rather see poeple actually get HELP with their problem than prison which often seems to almost come with a destiny of being a career criminal after time in prison. Maybe people who don’t judge them, people who don’t consider them to be ‘scum’ like police do, should be the one’s on the front lines dealing with the drug problems people face. Maybe people who even CARE about them and are invested in helping them to sort out their problems like counselors, priests, doctors, etc are in a better position to work a reducing the drug problem.

The drug war is a straight up failure and comes at a signficant cost in money and lives and ruined families, along with lots of completely innocent victims caught in the crossfire.

Ending drug prohibition is not about solving the drug problem. It’s about solving the CRIME and VIOLENCE problems.
 
As you can probably tell, I’m passionate about ending the war on drugs. I’m also against drug use and although don’t think it will ever completely end, think people can use more safely, posing considerably less harm to society, by changing the policy ending drug prohibition. Then we could focus on actually helping people who are addicted to drugs, as demand drives the business. With the end of prohibition prices would drop dramatically (it would be like importing coffee with similar costs without the mark up charged because people are risking life in prison or being killed in the drug trade under prohibition.

With low costs people would not need to resort to robbing and prostitution to feed their habbit (not too many ladies of the night selling themselves to feed their cigarette addiction, not too many alcoholics pulling armed robberies to feed their pint or quart of vodka per day habbit).

As an aside, ever wonder why people tend to love and appreciate firemen but a lot of people dislike the police? I think it’s because firemen sit around and wait until someone actually calls them for help, then they respond and help. Police are loved and respected for risking their lives doing what their specialty is: being rapid responders to dangerous situations. But it is all of their other duties they are charged with that irritate citizens. Intervening in situations where they are not called on to help. Things like traffic tickets, and of course when 2 people are involved in a drug transaction and neither party wants the police involved but they involve themselves nevertheless. It is these interactions that cause friction between police and citizens. I remember when I was a child, before the war on drugs really got up and running, police officers would have smiles on their faces out in public and greet store owners and store customers, behave friendly towards the members of the community they served. I remember going to a local drug store with my grandmother for lunch or a rootbeer float and the officer who patrolled the square would sit at the counter and chat with all of the customers/citizens. There was a feeling that he was on your side, your friend, there to look out for you, to help you. And the police much more often used the approach, when catching some teenagers doing something wrong, of contacting the parents and bringing together the parents and child and officer to problem solve. It was not immediate arrest in all cases as it seems to be now.

Their jobs were also a lot less dangerous in that when conducting a traffic stop the only people they really had to be afraid of were wanted murderers, wanted bank robbers, wanted rapists…people looking at significant jail time should the officer discover who they were. There is the risk the officer gets shot. And those people were few and far between. Their jobs did not consist of profiling people to figure out if they were transporting narcotics and trying to catch them at it. Car searches were really not part of the job. Nowadays there are millions and millions of people transporting drugs who have 2 strikes, or who would be facing 20 years in jail because of the quantity of drugs they are transporting… so now all of those people are added to the miniscule ammt of escaped murderers who may decide to shoot the officer when they are pulled over. This creates tension for the officers and leads to negative interactions between them and the average law abiding citizen who gets pulled over for speeding. The officer is on edge and frequently talks in a tone of voice that is disrespectful, talking down to the person, barking orders…

And police on the streets nowadays (unless you live in Maybury) are not smiling and don’t engage in friendly interactions with the citizens. They have blank stares, very serious looks on their faces, definitely giving off a vibe of unapproachable. This is not healthy for the officers and not healthy for the citizens. Sometimes I get the feeling like I am living in ‘occupied territory’ based on the way police present themselves. (Yes I am over generalizing).

Can you immagine that if firemen’s jobs expanded to include all sorts of duties where they patrolled the streets looking for potential fire safety issues, pulled people over and gave out tickets for things like liquid dripping from the tailpipe, grease on the engine, etc. Can you imagine if part of their job was to profile people and then try and sort of bully their way into getting people to consent to have their cars searched so they could try and find ashtrays with too many cigarettes, freyed wiring, etc and routinely handed out tickets for these infractions?

No, firemen either leave poeple alone until they are called and asked to help or they interact with citizens in a friendly manner. And people love them and respect them and there is no tension or fear of them. If the jobs of police officers reverted back to basically leaving poeple alone unless they are called for assistance the tension would dissipate. As it stands now people are talked at by the police much worse than some random customer service worker in department stores. People are not talked at like that by firemen. Firemen are not on a power trip.

I realize this post is an over generalization, but it contains truth. How many youtube video’s are there of firemen screaming at citizens, screaming at CHILDREN, etc? There are a disturbing number of video’s of police officers acting that way. And I think it stems from the war on drugs as I explained above. And that saddens me because I truely believe that police officers are hero’s for racing to the scene of a reported crime and being ready and willing to put themselves in harms way to protect a random citizen who called for help. But far too many of them are much to quick to temper, do not have the right disposition for the job (they have the disposition for responding to and dealing with armed bank robbers…great for those calls, for some little minor disturbing the peace…not so much…for a traffic stop…not so much.
 
Can anyone who is against marijuana answer this question please. Feel free to replace alcohol with cigarettes, football, high school cheerleading, etc.

medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000145

(Showing 0 deaths directly due to marijuana use, but many to legal substances)
I’m on your side bro. I’m not trying to forcibly take pot away from anyone. As long as people are not smoking it and driving children to school on a school bus or passing it around to children and the like I don’t think it’s anyone’s business if someone smokes marijuana or has a garage full of it.

I actually remember reading a statistic that came from the government itself where it showed there was a slight DECREASE in marijuana use in teens in states that either decriminalized it or did so for medical purposes compared to states where it was straight up illegal.

Sort of like the forbidden fruit. I’m not suprised. It’s like, why do so many teens in the USA drink to excess when the drinking age is 21 and in countries where the drinking age is like 15 and the norm is for kids to grow up where their first dozens and dozens of encounters with alcohol are having a small ammt of wine with dinner along with their families and on special occasions. No taboo, no forbidden fruit, no out of control use with their friends.
 
I agree that that makes sense Bill. There will be a very small change of usage of drugs with their legalization, either increase or decrease. Over time, if the drug is very good with low risk and high reward, it might increase, or if it’s fad fades away, it will decrease.

I’m glad to know I’m not the only Catholic who supports the freedom of choice, which I believe is the quintessential Christian right. Choice seems to get a bad rap among Catholics, but the only thing that is more important than choice is life.
 
The government’s purpose is simple - to protect life and liberty. It should not prevent people from doing what they want as long as what they do does not harm others’ rights.

It is immoral to have same sex marriages. God abhors it. However, should the government prevent this? I believe not.

Argument: gay marriage harms children who grow up in that environment. However, so does alcohol, but we aren’t prohibiting that.

I understand how people can confuse morality with law. But they are not always the same, since enforcing my morality on another person is almost always wrong.

To be clear - I support gay marriage and I support legalization of drugs, though I don’t drink or do drugs, and seeing homosexuals kiss makes me queasy. I am pro-life, as life must be protected, and believe that the government should protect life at the federal level if possible, as although we all have choice, we do not have the choice to take another person’s life, no matter how young.
I agree with this.
 
The government obtains it’s authority from God and has God’s sanction in so far as it follows the rule of God. If it doesn’t, then eventually it will fall the way of other governments of the past since they cannot stand alone on the rule of fallible man.

BTW: We have often heard the statement “separation of God and state”. This is nonsense. I’ll say it again,… this is nonsense.

The government should exercise and enforce God’s rules on His behalf and is mandated to do so. This includes restricting citizens if need be.

Also, the Catholic church is the only Church recognized by God to teach and guide governments.
All nice and everything until the state’s idea of God and what he wants differs from yours.

Separation of church and state is the only way to have religious freedom, and many other freedoms. Countless offenses have been committed against people by governments operating in the name of God. It is foolish to give them that authority.
 
False. Should we start laying off policeman because the “War on Robbery” has obviously failed? The “Three Strike Law” does not just apply to people who sell illegal drugs.

And I invite everyone to get the facts regarding the illegal drug crisis in the United States:

nationalmethcenter.org/STATES-HI.html

Peace,
Ed
Robbery is a crime committed against somebody else against their will.

Drug use is done by an individual alone. Totally different scenario.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top