Should individual states have the right to regulate social behavior?

Asked by: jtightlips24
  • Our behavior is regulated all the time

    Of course! Without government regulations there would be no clean water. Seat belt laws, drinking age rules. Underage marriage/sex of some religious institutions is highly regulated. Talk about infringement on the separation of church and state.

    As to the argument "As long it doesn't harm someone else" is highly subjective. What harms me may not harm someone else. If we only removed the physical harm scenario from this thought we then would still be left with emotional harm. We are the only nation that allows people to have unfettered access to guns. Along with that access we are willing to accept the staggering amount of people dying because of those guns. For me this is unconscionable. Example; more guns equal less violence and deaths. Contained in the social construct of gun ownership measured against facts internationally that note less guns equal less gun deaths. There is no indication that less guns increase non-violent crimes such as robberies.

    So because of gun laws (or lack there of) I am at great risk of being shot, women in domestic violence homes are at tremendous risk of dying at the hands of a gun owner. Is this a great example of social regulation and the difficult consequences it creates?

  • No, no, no!

    If the behavior in question does not infringe upon the equal rights of others, there is no legitimate reason to regulate it.

    People have the right to live freely, others do not have a right to not be offended. Not liking someone's behavior is not justification for making it illegal. This world would be a much nicer place to live in if humans simply accepted the fact that they don't get to rule over others.

    Posted by: Tink
  • There would be no point to having freedom if the State had the freedom to be a dictatorship

    I dont want any Government, local or national regulating our behavior. That whole "Move to a different state" doesnt fly by me. The whole purpose of the Constitution is to restrict any force on the people. Not to give local Government to regulate our behavior. Sorry, but culture does not define law. And there are so many different cultures within a state. I live in a particularly liberal medium sized city. I dont want someone in a small conservative town telling us what to do. And frankly, I dont want conservatives in my own town telling me what to do. SO no, I dont believe that state has any more right to police the people than federal government.

  • No they should not.

    Look, it is not the right of people to be able to regulate your social behavior, no matter how much closer they live to you. It is the job of the federal government to ensure that we are protected from the strict majority rule of the states. That's why federal trums state.

  • It's bad enough already...

    Seriously. Giving ANYTHING, and I mean ANYTHING, the right to control others social behavior is just plain stupid. It's bad enough what the government does already, but giving state governments the power over our freedoms and actions? If you've ever read Orwell's 1984, you'll know that letting the government control something like that is a recipe for disaster.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.