The folly of dependence on laws
 

In one of the more famous examples of using laws to pursue a political
objective, the former Soviet Union granted women absolute equality with
men. This was no mere law. Rather it was actually written into the
Soviet constitution. Then, a little over a decade later, the Soviet
Union collapsed and the status of even the most well educated women
plunged into the political basement. Their daughters often wound up
working as prostitutes.

What those who put absolute faith in laws always forget is that the
governments that pass them eventually collapse. Right now, American
feminists are scared that their hard won *right* to abortion will be
lost simply because of a changing of the guard in the Supreme Court.
Then that is the nature of manmade laws.

When governments fail, families survive. Even in war, women make love
and give birth. People search for meaning through established
religions. One of the first institutions to rise from the rubble of
the Soviet system was the church. Having lost their legal equality,
women once again had to find men able to support themselves and their
children.

The further laws stray from what people do normally do, the more severe
the correction when the political infrastructure shifts or collapses.
That is what happened to the equality of women in Russia. It is the
same trap into which no-spanks are set to fall since, having failed to
persuade parents to commit to their idiotic scheme, they are left with
only a recourse to the coercive power of laws in pursuit of their
agenda. It is one of the weakest position from which any faction can
operate. Indeed, it is often the hallmark of a politically
illegitimate regime!

The folly of dependence on laws
 

Opinions wrote:
In one of the more famous examples of using laws to pursue a political
objective, the former Soviet Union granted women absolute equality with
men. This was no mere law. Rather it was actually written into the
Soviet constitution. Then, a little over a decade later, the Soviet
Union collapsed and the status of even the most well educated women
plunged into the political basement. Their daughters often wound up
working as prostitutes.

.....which would lead to the logical conclusion that having given women
equality under their constitution brought down the soviet union, and by
correlation would therefore lead to the conclusion made their daughters
have to work as prostitutes. Yes, we understand. 0;-

What those who put absolute faith in laws always forget is that the
governments that pass them eventually collapse.

Presuming enough time passes it's possible that any government will
collapse. Absolute faith or lack thereof has little to do with it.

Right now, American
feminists are scared that their hard won *right* to abortion will be
lost simply because of a changing of the guard in the Supreme Court.
Then that is the nature of manmade laws.

Yes, certainly is. Woman made laws too.

When governments fail, families survive.

Actually you are wrong. Failing governments again and again destroy
families. Rwanda might be an example. Our own country after the civil
war, saw families disrupted and members scattered about the country.

Even in war, women make love
and give birth.

Gosh, I'm impressed with your insights.

People search for meaning through established
religions.

Yep, and having found meaning they have faith in, just as they have
faith in laws, sometimes it works, and sometimes, as you point out, it
doesn't. Fancy that.

One of the first institutions to rise from the rubble of
the Soviet system was the church.

What makes you think it was gone in Soviet society?

Having lost their legal equality,
women once again had to find men able to support themselves and their
children.

Then why do you think they turned to prostitution? Or are you now
admitting that was hyperbole and in fact women marry, and did before,
during, and after soviet govenrment?

The further laws stray from what people do normally do, the more severe
the correction when the political infrastructure shifts or collapses.

If we knew what you meant by "normally do" we might better understand
your point.

For myself, I look at history, even more recent history, and see that
women do a great deal that men do, and do so quite normally. They often
though are not compensated for it equally.

That is what happened to the equality of women in Russia.

What? A government collapsed and it effected the equality of women?
What do you think the men were doing while their "daughters" were doing
their prostitution?

It is the
same trap into which no-spanks are set to fall since, having failed to
persuade parents to commit to their idiotic scheme, they are left with
only a recourse to the coercive power of laws in pursuit of their
agenda.

So you expect now that our government will collapse as a result and the
children will become prostitutes. Yes, we see. 0;-

It is one of the weakest position from which any faction can
operate. Indeed, it is often the hallmark of a politically
illegitimate regime!

The use of the power of law is the hallmark of political illegitimacy?

What use would legitimate political regimes make of the power of law
then?

And what laws would fit what people do naturally, as you mentioned
earlier, presuming you mean that would make for a legitimate permanent
political regime?

Are you suggesting it's natural for men to beat women, and deny them
the vote and employment equality, and for parents to beat their
children and the law should reflect that "natural" state of humanity?

Which laws do you see as illigitimate and which legitimate? What human
actions and inactions do you consider natural and not?

So, you've been sitting there silently brooding since your last failed
fore' on this ng mulling this all over and have come up with a
solution. Let's hear it, Observer.

I'm especially interested in just how far a parent should be allowed to
go before the state intervenes in his or her discipline measures using
physical force.

How much injury is allowable as "natural?"

0:-

The folly of ..... The folly of dependence on laws
 

Opinions wrote:
In one of the more famous examples of using laws to pursue a political
objective, the former Soviet Union granted women absolute equality with
men. This was no mere law. Rather it was actually written into the
Soviet constitution. Then, a little over a decade later, the Soviet
Union collapsed and the status of even the most well educated women
plunged into the political basement. Their daughters often wound up
working as prostitutes.

.....which would lead to the logical conclusion that having given women
equality under their constitution brought down the soviet union, and by
correlation would therefore lead to the conclusion made their daughters
have to work as prostitutes. Yes, we understand. 0;-

What those who put absolute faith in laws always forget is that the
governments that pass them eventually collapse.

Presuming enough time passes it's possible that any government will
collapse. Absolute faith or lack thereof has little to do with it.

Right now, American
feminists are scared that their hard won *right* to abortion will be
lost simply because of a changing of the guard in the Supreme Court.
Then that is the nature of manmade laws.

Yes, certainly is. Woman made laws too.

When governments fail, families survive.

Actually you are wrong. Failing governments again and again destroy
families. Rwanda might be an example. Our own country after the civil
war, saw families disrupted and members scattered about the country.

Even in war, women make love
and give birth.

Gosh, I'm impressed with your insights.

People search for meaning through established
religions.

Yep, and having found meaning they have faith in, just as they have
faith in laws, sometimes it works, and sometimes, as you point out, it
doesn't. Fancy that.

One of the first institutions to rise from the rubble of
the Soviet system was the church.

What makes you think it was gone in Soviet society?

Having lost their legal equality,
women once again had to find men able to support themselves and their
children.

Then why do you think they turned to prostitution? Or are you now
admitting that was hyperbole and in fact women marry, and did before,
during, and after soviet govenrment?

The further laws stray from what people do normally do, the more severe
the correction when the political infrastructure shifts or collapses.

If we knew what you meant by "normally do" we might better understand
your point.

For myself, I look at history, even more recent history, and see that
women do a great deal that men do, and do so quite normally. They often
though are not compensated for it equally.

That is what happened to the equality of women in Russia.

What? A government collapsed and it effected the equality of women?
What do you think the men were doing while their "daughters" were doing
their prostitution?

It is the
same trap into which no-spanks are set to fall since, having failed to
persuade parents to commit to their idiotic scheme, they are left with
only a recourse to the coercive power of laws in pursuit of their
agenda.

So you expect now that our government will collapse as a result and the
children will become prostitutes. Yes, we see. 0;-

It is one of the weakest position from which any faction can
operate. Indeed, it is often the hallmark of a politically
illegitimate regime!

The use of the power of law is the hallmark of political illegitimacy?

What use would legitimate political regimes make of the power of law
then?

And what laws would fit what people do naturally, as you mentioned
earlier, presuming you mean that would make for a legitimate permanent
political regime?

Are you suggesting it's natural for men to beat women, and deny them
the vote and employment equality, and for parents to beat their
children and the law should reflect that "natural" state of humanity?

Which laws do you see as illigitimate and which legitimate? What human
actions and inactions do you consider natural and not?

So, you've been sitting there silently brooding since your last failed
fore' on this ng mulling this all over and have come up with a
solution. Let's hear it, Observer.

I'm especially interested in just how far a parent should be allowed to
go before the state intervenes in his or her discipline measures using
physical force.

How much injury is allowable as "natural?"

0:-

PHISHER AT WORK; DON'T WAKE IT UP The folly of ..... The folly of dependence on laws
 

GO TRY WAREZ; THEY'RE MORE YOUR STYLE THAN THE FECES-LADEN
NON-SUPPORT YOU DROP IN THIS GROUP. GO PILLAGE ELSEWHERE
MORON. OOPS; SORRY, DIDN'T MEAN TO CALL YOU A MORON; THAT'S A
TERM FOR SAPIENT BEINGS.


wrote in message
oups.com...
:
: Opinions wrote:
: In one of the more famous examples of using laws to pursue a
political
: objective, the former Soviet Union granted women absolute
equality with
: men. This was no mere law. Rather it was actually written
into the
: Soviet constitution. Then, a little over a decade later, the
Soviet
: Union collapsed and the status of even the most well educated
women
: plunged into the political basement. Their daughters often
wound up
: working as prostitutes.
:
: ....which would lead to the logical conclusion that having
given women
: equality under their constitution brought down the soviet
union, and by
: correlation would therefore lead to the conclusion made their
daughters
: have to work as prostitutes. Yes, we understand. 0;-
:
: What those who put absolute faith in laws always forget is
that the
: governments that pass them eventually collapse.
:
: Presuming enough time passes it's possible that any government
will
: collapse. Absolute faith or lack thereof has little to do with
it.
:
: Right now, American
: feminists are scared that their hard won *right* to abortion
will be
: lost simply because of a changing of the guard in the Supreme
Court.
: Then that is the nature of manmade laws.
:
: Yes, certainly is. Woman made laws too.
:
: When governments fail, families survive.
:
: Actually you are wrong. Failing governments again and again
destroy
: families. Rwanda might be an example. Our own country after the
civil
: war, saw families disrupted and members scattered about the
country.
:
: Even in war, women make love
: and give birth.
:
: Gosh, I'm impressed with your insights.
:
: People search for meaning through established
: religions.
:
: Yep, and having found meaning they have faith in, just as they
have
: faith in laws, sometimes it works, and sometimes, as you point
out, it
: doesn't. Fancy that.
:
: One of the first institutions to rise from the rubble of
: the Soviet system was the church.
:
: What makes you think it was gone in Soviet society?
:
: Having lost their legal equality,
: women once again had to find men able to support themselves
and their
: children.
:
: Then why do you think they turned to prostitution? Or are you
now
: admitting that was hyperbole and in fact women marry, and did
before,
: during, and after soviet govenrment?
:
: The further laws stray from what people do normally do, the
more severe
: the correction when the political infrastructure shifts or
collapses.
:
: If we knew what you meant by "normally do" we might better
understand
: your point.
:
: For myself, I look at history, even more recent history, and
see that
: women do a great deal that men do, and do so quite normally.
They often
: though are not compensated for it equally.
:
: That is what happened to the equality of women in Russia.
:
: What? A government collapsed and it effected the equality of
women?
: What do you think the men were doing while their "daughters"
were doing
: their prostitution?
:
: It is the
: same trap into which no-spanks are set to fall since, having
failed to
: persuade parents to commit to their idiotic scheme, they are
left with
: only a recourse to the coercive power of laws in pursuit of
their
: agenda.
:
: So you expect now that our government will collapse as a result
and the
: children will become prostitutes. Yes, we see. 0;-
:
: It is one of the weakest position from which any faction can
: operate. Indeed, it is often the hallmark of a politically
: illegitimate regime!
:
: The use of the power of law is the hallmark of political
illegitimacy?
:
: What use would legitimate political regimes make of the power
of law
: then?
:
: And what laws would fit what people do naturally, as you
mentioned
: earlier, presuming you mean that would make for a legitimate
permanent
: political regime?
:
: Are you suggesting it's natural for men to beat women, and deny
them
: the vote and employment equality, and for parents to beat their
: children and the law should reflect that "natural" state of
humanity?
:
: Which laws do you see as illigitimate and which legitimate?
What human
: actions and inactions do you consider natural and not?
:
: So, you've been sitting there silently brooding since your last
failed
: fore' on this ng mulling this all over and have come up with a
: solution. Let's hear it, Observer.
:
: I'm especially interested in just how far a parent should be
allowed to
: go before the state intervenes in his or her discipline
measures using
: physical force.
:
: How much injury is allowable as "natural?"
:
: 0:-
: