Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
If a religious person's faith can reasonably be construed as shaping their opinions (I agree it is), why isn't another person't lack of faith equally significant in shaping opinions?
|
The point I was trying to make, Jim, is that our federal government, as originally designed, does not have authority to act on matters that do not fall within the enumerations granted to it in the Constitution. And that our central government has been transformed into one which can legislate regarding every "opinion" whether constitutionally empowered or not.
If you step outside the limits of that box and enter into the limitless terrain of progressive government which can make law and policy on any matter or "opinion" it wants, then you will have no persuasive argument. You will merely have an opposing "opinion" to which you are not legally entitled to act upon without the government's consent.
This is what you have done by trying to logically balance the validity of asking candidates about lack of faith as well as about their personal faith because both shape their opinions. The implication, therefor, in asking either question is to determine personal opinions which will influence how the candidates would govern. But that already, in itself, is granting that government can and does legislate by opinion, even on matters outside of its purview.
And that is why I have said that such questions which are outside the box of government's constitutional domain are irrelevant and shouldn't even be asked. And the reason they are asked is to put certain candidates into a quandary as to how they should respond for the ears of a populace which has been shaped, influenced, by progressive education, media, and demagogic politicians.
We have been warned, even by socialists such as Orwell, about the tyranny of a government which owns the rights to all opinion and which legislates, controls, which opinions are valid. Even a current "liberal" media personality, Kirsten Powers, has a new book, "The Silencing, How the Left is Killing Free Speech." I haven't read it, but interviews with her indicate that the federal government's commandeering of the first amendment is a loss of individual freedom, and to be feared rather than admired.