What should a democratic government's function be?

I do agree with that statement. At least to the extent that harming an animal needlessly be treated as a crime and prosecuted likewise.

Re: What should a democratic government's function be?


Why aren't they relevant? (That's a real question btw! )

The government passes laws that allow the raising of taxes and then to spend that revenue which certinaly brings it into the "legal system". The taking of those taxes also infringes on an individual's rights to keep what they earn.

But, beyond the issue of taxes - I'd say no. I don't agree. The statement reflects an extreme Libertarian viewpoint. I generally like the libertarian view of things but there are times when the function of government is to perform functions of social control. Storing 5000 gallons of gasoline in my back yard may not infringe on anyone elses rights but there is a good possibility that the gasoline could leak or explode and we empower the government to consider those possibilities and prevent them from happening to avert future possible problems.

Good point fishin.

I guess I didn't think it through all the way. There are probably some roles the government should oversee.

These include things such as the FDA, antitrust control and other functions.

I guess what I was getting at is in terms of issues that truly don't hurt anyone else.

Issues such as sodomy, homosexual rights, and other such matters.

Do you agree with my stance related to issues that truly don't harm other individuals or put them at additional harm?

I was jes thinkin' bout the critters!

On the specific issues you mention - yep. I agree completely assuming we are talking about competent people of legal age.

I have rather a different view of the proper role of government. On another thread, I mentioned today that I'd just watched (for a second time) part four of the amazing Burns documentary for PBS on New York City. Part four looks at the beginning of the last century with its activist movements for workplace safety, child protection laws, and other such labor legislation. The horrid Triangle Shirtwaist Building fire (doors locked from outside to keep workers from taking breaks, and so as to keep union organizers out) resulted in the deaths of many teenage girls who lept eight stories to their deaths onto the sidewalks or impaled on the ironwork fence.

The public outcry which followed led to an investigation by Al Smith (and others), and that led to a raft of legislation and to the beginnings of the New Deal.

Having worked on many construction sites, I can assure one and all that, given an absence of building codes, no small number of construction companies and sub-contractors would build with spaghetti and cardboard, then take the money and go buy a house somewhere where there were codes in place.

Government has a role to monitor and to enforce standards under which we all live and work. That role acknowledges a simple truth about we humans...enough of us are pathologically self-interested such that Triangle Shirtwaist Building fires can happen, have happened, and will happen.

Further, I am quite happy to support a government which feels that we are all better off when the lowest among us are aided.

On individual moral and personal choices (where no others are negatively effected) the government really ought not to be involved.

I guess this didn't turn out to be the heated debate I expected.

I doubt very many people will disagree with my position on the issue as it now stands.

Feel free to delete this post fishin'

How about a libertarian view that the national government should provide for the common defense and promote (not provide) the common welfare, but anything that does not fall within the letter and intent of the Constitution should be within the jurisdiction of the states.

And government within the states and cities should do only that which cannot be done more effectively and efficiently by the private sector.

No law should be in conflict with Constitutional rights and no law should interfere with the inalienable rights which I define as that which requires nothing from another other than his/her non interference.

I think humane treatment of both humans and animals could fall under 'promote the common welfare'.

Re: What should a democratic government's function be?

To which "Joe" do you refer? There are several on these forums.