Paul responded to my post on morality. I am glad he did, because it made it clear that a significant portion of our disagreement came from a misunderstanding of what morality means. Since many of Paul's points are based upon his misunderstanding, there is no reason for discussing his points here. However, I thought it useful to publish part of his email as a way to clarify the meaning of morality. Paul stated:
All of the arguments you make have noting to do with morality. Morality isn't the action, its the THOUGHT. I fully stand by my statement."Morality: A system of ideas of right and wrong conduct" The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language.
I say again - you CANNOT legislate morality (ideas). Actions, sure you can gain as much control over a person as they are willing to give you. What they believe in the privacy of their own minds is inviolate.
This misunderstanding of morality may explain why some people say you cannot legislate morality. If by this statement, one means that human governments may not enforce laws about human thoughts, then I would agree. And thus one of the main points of disagreement between Paul and myself would vanish. However, this is not what morality means. Contrary to Paul's position, morality specifically includes the action. As the definition he provided states, morality is about right and wrong conduct. And laws certainly legislate right and wrong conduct with prescribed penalties for wrong behavior. Thus, governments have legislated morality as long as we have had governments and they will continue to do so in the future. The only question is whose morality will be legislated?