The Stupidity of Banning People From Doing What They Enjoy

Or...Ban, Baby, Ban!

Freedom was written into the Constitution. There were only a few instances (in its Amendments) where the Constitution actually banned certain procedures, social institutions or substances:

Abolition (Prohibition) of Slavery
Prohibition of the Poll Tax
Prohibition of Alcohol
Prohibition of Cruel and Unusual Punishment

So, in a way, the Constitution - through some of its prohibitions - legislated morality. When it banned personal freedoms, such as drinking alcohol, it met with some very disastrous results: (From Wikipedia):

The effects of Prohibition were largely unanticipated. Production, importation and distribution of alcoholic beverages—once the province of legitimate business—were taken over by criminal gangs, which fought each other for market control in violent confrontations, including mass murder. Top gangsters became rich and were admired locally, such as Omaha's Tom Dennison, and nationally, such as Chicago's Al Capone. This effectively made murderers into national celebrities. Enforcement was difficult because the gangs became so rich that they were often able to bribe underpaid and understaffed law-enforcement personnel and hire top lawyers.

Evangelists have tried - and failed - to ban things people truly enjoy: Carry Nation and Billy Sunday both crusaded for the prohibition of alcohol. Southern Baptist churches have had a ban on dancing. But dancing (like sex) is hard to ban since it is an enjoyable pastime.

Now people are trying to ban love and commitment.

At least, that's what marriage is supposed to be. However, love and commitment are rather popular these days, and when people want to ban them or even restrict them in any way, the public will still do what it wants in secret (like back-alley abortions, illegal commitments will still happen). The funny thing about banning same-sex marriages is that they still have to be proven harmful to the public at large. People who espouse the "protection" of marriage have put forth lame "theories" about what legalization of gay marriage would do to families, but no concrete facts. So, the same argument that they (erroneously) use on evolution could be used here: "Same-sex marriage as a social detriment is ONLY A THEORY."

Of course, the mentality of Christofascists does not accept rationality. They're still working to repeal the ban on "cruel and unusual punishment."

Just a thought.