The ideal is a society founded on Judeo-Christian principles and values.
Oh, that just sounds absolutely sublime. Ooh, maybe we can have another crusade, where we go invade the Middle East in the name of God. And since we're on the side of God, we can even take stuff that doesn't belong to us!
Oh wait.
So biblical principles are the primary source.
Keep your magic book out of the government, please. I don't care what you believe in, but forcing your morals down our throats by way of law is fascism, plain and simple. Maybe our government was created with Judeo-Christian values in mind, but there's a reason that there's no mention of God in any of the founding legal documents (and no, the Declaration is not a legal document). You want "historical significance?" Here's some: America was founded partially because Britain was trying to cram the King's version of Christianity down its peoples' throats. Government-sponsored religion is exactly what this country was founded to prevent.
And you want to force us all to abide by your Christian morality structure because you claim it's the ideal that our government was founded upon? Give me a break. The only reason Christianity had anything to do with the creation of our government was because nobody had any idea of a morality structure WITHOUT Christianity at the time. A flawed structure is better than no structure, I suppose.
The next source is the will of the People. The power to strengthen society ultimately rests in the hands of the People. And through elected representatives our republican government establishes laws that reflect the values of the citizenry. And it's there at every level of government. National, state, and local. We're in a federal republic. So the People down at the local level have the power to organize and run their communities according to their will and preference. So if a federalist system like ours, prostitution might be legal in Nevada and illegal here in New Jersey. With the 21st Amendment, some counties may decide to sell liquor and others may be dry. That's the beauty of the American system.
You forgot the corporate lobby groups buying out politicians to make their own laws that can essentially render any passed referendum, which is the last real bastion of true Democracy in our government, completely useless. I agree with your proposal that we are a "federal republic," because we're sure as hell not a democracy anymore. Every election, we get to "choose" between socialist candidate and fascist candidate, both of whom often clearly have undiagnosed mental health issues. So much for the warnings against a two-party system and electing candidates who want to be in government.
As for the luxury tax issue you discussed earlier, I'm not sure whether I agree or disagree. I don't like a lot of government controls on the economy, but luxury taxes are one of the few that I've actually supported (though they do need to be lowered). I believe that all I said, however, was that if marijuana was legalized, it should be taxed, not that it should be taxed highly. Let's say we don't tax it at all; the benefits are still there. It could be a boon to the economy; the tobacco industry employs thousands of people in our country, perhaps millions. Who's to say that a marijuana industry isn't just what we need to get out of this poor economy?
Alright, that's what I thought you were doing. The answer is that not all crime's hurt people. Embezzling money, stealing, drunk driving, cheating on taxes, not paying your taxes at all, refusing the draft, prostitution, lying under oath, slander, libel, election rigging, illegal immigration... see where I'm going with this? A functioning society requires laws that uphold moral order and civic virtue, not just civil liberties and individual sovereignty. The Founders designed a republic based on the rule of law and civic duty. Designed to protect freedoms and build a strong social foundation.
Embezzling money hurts the economy, which hurts people. Stealing hurts people. Drunk driving kills people. Cheating on taxes hurts the government, so make of that what you will. Refusing the draft hurts the people doing the fighting, as taking a conscientious objector position will help save the lives of others who choose to fight. Prostitution objectifies women, but may help prevent rape, so that's hard to decide. Lying under oath may hurt whoever's on the other side. Slander and libel hurt peoples' images. Election rigging hurts an entire nation. Illegal immigration hurts the economy, which hurts people. So only two or three of those don't hurt people.
"Virtue" and "morality" are ambiguous; homosexuality is something that is tolerable now, but was demonized for centuries, and pedophilia is something that's demonized now, but was tolerable for centuries. Upholding "morality" shouldn't mean upholding your version of morality, which is why we need to make laws that make our lives better, not ones that force one group to live by another group's rules. If we take into account peoples' rights, we can make assumptions about the previous "morally ambiguous" actions. Homosexuality doesn't invade anyone's rights (though rape does), so that should be legal. Pedophilia almost always invades a child's rights, so that should be illegal. Strangely enough, our government actually seems to have gotten it right there. Maybe they can do that more often.
