Let's start with some facts.
In the United States, polygamy is illegal. It is illegal in every single state. It's a misdemeanor in some, and a felony in others, but illegal everywhere. Adultery is chargeable with a felony in Wisconsin, and can be served with a life sentence in Michigan. One can also be court-martialed if in the military while committing such an act. Of these two, polygamy is heavily persecuted wherever it occurs, while adultery is only occasionally sentenced under the law, though both are socially unacceptable in this day and age.
Now, what does the government have to do with the relationships of people?
Oh, alright. There can be issues with having too many kids in a polygamist family for the family to support, but that's really the only thing I can think of not covered by the law. I don't think that in and of itself is enough to make this illegal. I mean, what other harms are there? (Apart from every celebrity instantly having 100 wives/husbands, and the rest of American males/females becoming wiveless/husbandless.)
As for adultery, does the government have to make people be faithful to their spouses? (Alright, you've been emotionally hurt, but if you're in a relationship to someone, it's hardly binding. You're a dick if you cheat, but since when does the government regulate douchebags?) I could think of at least a dozen other things money and time allocated to such cases could be better spent on.
Like gambling, if all the people in a polygamist family consent to such a relationship, what right does society have to intervene? (No! It's not fair that you have two spouses! It's not fair. IT'S NOT FAIR!) Likewise, if someone decides to cheat on a significant other, what right does society have to tell them it's illegal to do so? (NO! If you get into a relationship with me, you're NEVER allowed to leave!)
Once again, this is society/government getting into the lives of other people. Polygamy and adultery don't physically harm anyone directly, and establishing any indirect harms are nigh impossible. It's not as if every adulterer punches a random passerby before cheating. One time emotional harm is nothing illegal (though emotional trauma, as is sustained emotional harm, also known as bullying).
I believe that both of these are relics of Christian influence in American law. That is not to say Christian influence does not still exist, nor is it to say that it is acceptable. (Neither is the influence of any major religion, lack thereof, or most self-interested agendas.) I may go into depth about that later on, but that's not the topic at hand. If one looks at (Gasp!) the Christian bible, adultery and polygamy are both quite clearly held in contempt.
To end this spiel, one could apply these same arguments to why gay (otherwise known as GBLTPQetc., or whatever the acronym is now) marriages should be legal across the USA. "Oh, but they offend me!" Tough.
tl;dr Polygamy and adultery are not something in the government's domain. They may be regarded as immoral or unethical by most of society, but they have no direct victims, and should thus not be the concern of government.
Showing posts with label Laws. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Laws. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Monday, April 18, 2011
Consent & Gambling
There are a lot of things which are illegal. In Washington state, it's illegal to videotape someone without their consent. Across the world, it's illegal to have sex with someone without their consent. (Here's a hint: that's called rape.) It is illegal to take an item from someone without their consent (theft), and it is illegal to enter someone's property without their consent (trespassing). Of course, these actions all become legal if the person in question (in their right mind, of course) says you can, whether verbally, via writing, or otherwise.
But wait! What about stores? I know they have security cameras that tape me whenever I go in! Aren't those illegal?
This is where implied consent comes in. Privately owned businesses essentially host you while you're in their store. They have rules, and can expel you for not following them, like any household. (Unlike most households, stores have security guards to carry you away, however.) Some rules might be, "No stealing", or "No killing", and you have to agree with these before you enter. It's doubtful you've ever been approached by an associate of the store and asked to agree to these things, and it would be a pain to make everyone verbally agree to it before entering. The consent to follow those rules is implied, and it's implied that you give consent to cameras to film you while you're inside the store, or on the premises.
Now, life has risks. If I step outside, I could be struck by lightning, drowned by a rogue tidal wave, or eaten by a starving dinosaur. Again, you don't have to sign any sort of liability form before you exit your house; the consent to risking these dangers are all implied. Of course, should someone take action and harm you, that's against the law. Following that train of thought, it's implied one does not consent to being stabbed, or robbed.
On to gambling. When I talk about gambling, I'm not talking about horse races, or casinos, or those scratch card games. I'm talking about "social gambling", as it's called under the law. "Social gambling" is essentially getting together with friends (usually in the privacy of one's home), pulling out a deck of cards, or whathaveyou, and putting some cash at stake. That sort of gambling is illegal in 22 states, fined in another, and regulated to $10 stake/person in another. (Though how they regulate that is beyond me, as well as how states uphold such laws in the first place.)
Why is this illegal? When you decide to play some poker with friends, you willingly give up the stake, ante, or bet. Nobody is pointing a gun to your head (one should hope); you're there of your own volition, and if you lose money, it was your choice of your own will to give it up. The government has no laws against throwing money off a cliff (Laws concerning defacing/destroying currency only involve intent for fraud.), so why have laws against social gambling?
The government's a busybody. I imagine I sound quite snooty saying (typing?) this, but it's none of the government's business what you do with your money, so long as it does not harm anyone else, or their property. The only argument for the regulation/illegality of gambling is its addictive qualities. This raises a few more questions. First, is it the government's position to make sure you don't do stupid things which harms only you? Everybody gambling in a social environment has already agreed to the circumstances - it is the government's place to run in full throttle and yell "SCREW YOU I'M NOT IMPACTED BY THIS AND ALL OF YOU CONSENT BUT YOU CAN'T DO IT ANYWAYS!" (Alright, maybe a family could get hurt, but one would think social gambling among friends wouldn't go that far. The family bit is still a legitimate argument.) Second, why is World of Warcraft legal?
Interestingly (unlike the rest of the topics I'll discuss this week), the Christian bible has nothing to say about gambling, or at least not directly.
But wait! What about stores? I know they have security cameras that tape me whenever I go in! Aren't those illegal?
This is where implied consent comes in. Privately owned businesses essentially host you while you're in their store. They have rules, and can expel you for not following them, like any household. (Unlike most households, stores have security guards to carry you away, however.) Some rules might be, "No stealing", or "No killing", and you have to agree with these before you enter. It's doubtful you've ever been approached by an associate of the store and asked to agree to these things, and it would be a pain to make everyone verbally agree to it before entering. The consent to follow those rules is implied, and it's implied that you give consent to cameras to film you while you're inside the store, or on the premises.
Now, life has risks. If I step outside, I could be struck by lightning, drowned by a rogue tidal wave, or eaten by a starving dinosaur. Again, you don't have to sign any sort of liability form before you exit your house; the consent to risking these dangers are all implied. Of course, should someone take action and harm you, that's against the law. Following that train of thought, it's implied one does not consent to being stabbed, or robbed.
On to gambling. When I talk about gambling, I'm not talking about horse races, or casinos, or those scratch card games. I'm talking about "social gambling", as it's called under the law. "Social gambling" is essentially getting together with friends (usually in the privacy of one's home), pulling out a deck of cards, or whathaveyou, and putting some cash at stake. That sort of gambling is illegal in 22 states, fined in another, and regulated to $10 stake/person in another. (Though how they regulate that is beyond me, as well as how states uphold such laws in the first place.)
Why is this illegal? When you decide to play some poker with friends, you willingly give up the stake, ante, or bet. Nobody is pointing a gun to your head (one should hope); you're there of your own volition, and if you lose money, it was your choice of your own will to give it up. The government has no laws against throwing money off a cliff (Laws concerning defacing/destroying currency only involve intent for fraud.), so why have laws against social gambling?
The government's a busybody. I imagine I sound quite snooty saying (typing?) this, but it's none of the government's business what you do with your money, so long as it does not harm anyone else, or their property. The only argument for the regulation/illegality of gambling is its addictive qualities. This raises a few more questions. First, is it the government's position to make sure you don't do stupid things which harms only you? Everybody gambling in a social environment has already agreed to the circumstances - it is the government's place to run in full throttle and yell "SCREW YOU I'M NOT IMPACTED BY THIS AND ALL OF YOU CONSENT BUT YOU CAN'T DO IT ANYWAYS!" (Alright, maybe a family could get hurt, but one would think social gambling among friends wouldn't go that far. The family bit is still a legitimate argument.) Second, why is World of Warcraft legal?
Interestingly (unlike the rest of the topics I'll discuss this week), the Christian bible has nothing to say about gambling, or at least not directly.
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Illegal? Why?
There are plenty of idiotic laws out there, probably (hopefully!) a relic of times gone by. But to this day, there are still prominent laws which crack down on things which do not hurt anyone (except perhaps the doer). Why should we, as a society, have laws concerning things which do no harm to others?
I guess I should start with what I think laws are for. Laws are how the government maintains the order of society. They prevents people from killing someone because they feel like it (or at least punishes them duly) and give a reason not to break contracts, or make life for someone else miserable.
As a general statement, people should be free to do what they like. But as Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. (A supreme court member in the early 1900's) said, "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." Or, in other words, so long as your actions do not harm the property or body of another person, you can do it. I believe laws should uphold this - they should deter people from harming property which is not theirs, nor other people. That may be accomplished by putting a punishment on the act itself, or on intending to perform such an act. There may be other cases, but those are the only two which come to mind.
Examples of punishing an act are easy - murder, arson, theft, abuse are among acts punishable by law. Others, such as drunk driving, also go here. They are all acts which have a direct victim - the person, or person whose property has been hurt/destroyed/wounded/maimed (or in the case of murder, killed).
Examples of punishing intent are also easy to think of - intent to kill, intent to steal, etc. Generally these are most easily spotted on people with a record of performing the act in question, but are generally harder to spot. (And if police didn't have telepathy, damn, they'd be uncatchable!) Stalking may seem like it would fit under this category, but it's legally put under harassment, which makes sense, when you think about it.
Anyways, what about laws which don't fit under either of these categories? Like making gambling illegal? Or those which make polygamy, pot/other drugs (The distribution of such drugs to minors, however, should be illegal), prostitution, and adultery (I'm looking at you, Michigan and Wisconsin) all illegal? (Oh, and suicide has legal ramifications as well.)
I will note now that I do not necessarily advocate any of these things, but merely their decriminalization, as it makes no sense for them to be criminal activities.
Through this week, I'll be posting about these things, why they shouldn't be against the law, why other things (like flamethrowers, not getting your children immunizations, being a CEO of a company which screws up the economy) should be illegal or regulated.
Just to map out this week, here's the list of topics I'll go through:
Consent, implied consent, and gambling
Relations, sexual or otherwise (polygamy & adultery)
Drug laws (and why their inconsistency/lack of effectiveness makes them moot)
Control over one's body (suicide)
Busybodies and how religion factors in
Some things which should be illegal, or regulated.
Hopefully, this will get me back in the regular habit of posting again.
I guess I should start with what I think laws are for. Laws are how the government maintains the order of society. They prevents people from killing someone because they feel like it (or at least punishes them duly) and give a reason not to break contracts, or make life for someone else miserable.
As a general statement, people should be free to do what they like. But as Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. (A supreme court member in the early 1900's) said, "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." Or, in other words, so long as your actions do not harm the property or body of another person, you can do it. I believe laws should uphold this - they should deter people from harming property which is not theirs, nor other people. That may be accomplished by putting a punishment on the act itself, or on intending to perform such an act. There may be other cases, but those are the only two which come to mind.
Examples of punishing an act are easy - murder, arson, theft, abuse are among acts punishable by law. Others, such as drunk driving, also go here. They are all acts which have a direct victim - the person, or person whose property has been hurt/destroyed/wounded/maimed (or in the case of murder, killed).
Examples of punishing intent are also easy to think of - intent to kill, intent to steal, etc. Generally these are most easily spotted on people with a record of performing the act in question, but are generally harder to spot. (And if police didn't have telepathy, damn, they'd be uncatchable!) Stalking may seem like it would fit under this category, but it's legally put under harassment, which makes sense, when you think about it.
Anyways, what about laws which don't fit under either of these categories? Like making gambling illegal? Or those which make polygamy, pot/other drugs (The distribution of such drugs to minors, however, should be illegal), prostitution, and adultery (I'm looking at you, Michigan and Wisconsin) all illegal? (Oh, and suicide has legal ramifications as well.)
I will note now that I do not necessarily advocate any of these things, but merely their decriminalization, as it makes no sense for them to be criminal activities.
Through this week, I'll be posting about these things, why they shouldn't be against the law, why other things (like flamethrowers, not getting your children immunizations, being a CEO of a company which screws up the economy) should be illegal or regulated.
Just to map out this week, here's the list of topics I'll go through:
Consent, implied consent, and gambling
Relations, sexual or otherwise (polygamy & adultery)
Drug laws (and why their inconsistency/lack of effectiveness makes them moot)
Control over one's body (suicide)
Busybodies and how religion factors in
Some things which should be illegal, or regulated.
Hopefully, this will get me back in the regular habit of posting again.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Why Does This Exist? (Washington Laws)
Starting a new series on the blog, on why various things exist. Irony would demand that this be the sole entry in the series, and that I will forget about it after I post this.
This time around, it's laws.
This whole thing was sparked when I stumbled upon a Seattle law which stated that it was illegal to carry a concealed weapon longer than six feet in length...
I don't think anybody uses glaives any more. Or halberds, guisarmes, or claymores. You know, just a thought. On top of that....there aren't too many people who could possibly run afoul of said law, as most people are not above six feet tall. One might find such a concealed weapon a little conspicuous, no? What forced this to become a law in the first place? Too many people stuffing cannon down their pants? (Hurr, hurr, yes, I know, I know...)
Anyways, following are some more laws whose existence is questionable, and my commentary...
And some will just be laws purposefully misconstrued.
RCW 9.41.280 makes it illegal to carry nunchaku or shuriken onto school property. Do we really have that large of a ninja problem in Washington state? And why are these ninjas trying to infiltrate the schools, anyways? One can only imagine what secrets are hidden in the teacher's lounge, one supposes. Bur obviously these lawmakers are not literate in the ways of the ninja. They have left off the kunai, something in the arsenal of every ninja, which, while technically it is classified as a gardening tool, is lethal in the hands of a ninja. Well, then, again, what isn't?
RCW 9.47A.020 makes it illegal to inhale car exhaust. Benzene is one of the many chemicals contained within car exhaust, and this law makes inhaling, or causing another person to inhale this, illegal. So, every pedestrian and motor vehicle driver should be booked with a misdemeanor, as it states in section 050.
SMC 12A.06.070 states that "a person is guilty of failing to summon assistance when...he or she fails to summon assistance." Well, I never would have guessed that. I mean, how could failing to summon aid ever be considered failing to summon aid? It's like saying that incompetent teachers with seniority should be fired in place of better teachers better at teaching, except even harder to believe!
SMC 12A.14.081 states that it is illegal for persons under 18 to carry personal protection spray devices, unless they are older than 14 and have the permission of a parent or guardian. So, in other words, unless you have permission, you are not allowed to carry AXE around with you in case you need to protect your body from B.O. without permission. Same goes for other spray-on deodorants. Huh.
And finally...
SMC 15.36.010 states that in order to carry or lift heavy articles or materials, one must first have a license. Bring this tidbit to the gym next time, why don'tcha?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)