Anderson Co. suspends Blue Laws

[Chickenwing]

Since we are talking about the restrictive nature of the blue laws. How do you guys feel about things like quotas on Chinese goods?

Both are restrictive on what we can buy, and when we can buy it.

[Spartan]

You bring up an interesting point, and I don't disagree with you. Laws should not compel anyone to believe a certain religion, because as we have seen, it is bad for societies. However, our faith, whether it be God, Allah, multiple gods, nature, or something else, is part of who we are as individual people, and I just do not see how it is possible to turn that off when building a set of laws.

The whole idea ends up being so much more complex than just "we should separate church and state".

What is the alternative --

Do we build a code of laws on what the majority agrees on?

How large does that majority need to be?

What happens to the minority that may be oppressed by these laws?

What happens to the minority when they fight back?

While that is a valid list of questions, I have serious doubts about the oppression of minority religions in this country. In fact, he current situation has the majority (Christianity) being repressed by an expreme minority (and usually not a religious minority!). Unless you consider 'jedi' a religion.

Since we are talking about the restrictive nature of the blue laws. How do you guys feel about things like quotas on Chinese goods?

Both are restrictive on what we can buy, and when we can buy it.

That question is more appropriate for another topic.

[monsoon]

What is the alternative --

Do we build a code of laws on what the majority agrees on?

How large does that majority need to be?

What happens to the minority that may be oppressed by these laws?

What happens to the minority when they fight back?

Well if you have a secular government then the answer is yes and that is what our Constitution attempts to create. Code of Laws based on what the majority wants.

A little review:

Laws are created by the Legislative branch (Congress). Members are elected by majority vote and most votes in congress are decided by majority. In this case, one vote is a majority. It is possible for a tie to occur in the Senate, then the Vice President votes as he is the head of the Senate. Laws do not go into effect untill the President signs them into law, or he is overridden by a super majority.

So any law on the books was decided by a majority of congress who were elected by a majority of voters in their district. Keep in mind this is not a majority of the people because most people in this country either can't or choose not to vote.

As a check on this "majority rule" the Judicial branch decides if laws are supported by the US Constitution. They have the power to invalidate the law. These decisions are made by simple majority as well. If this happens, Congress has the ability to amend the Constitution, but the terms for doing so are much more difficult so it rarely happens. I think the last really important amendment occured in the 1960s which lowered the voting age from 21 to 18. (argument was that if 18 y/os could be drafted to fight in Vietnam, they should be able to vote)

Minorities have often been oppressed in the USA, because as you noted, the majority decides what will happen. Since all of these decisions are made by humans, personal desires, beliefs, etc all creep into the decisions that put laws onto the books.

Some examples

• Blacks could be held as Slaves

• Women were not allowed to vote until the 20th century

• Americans, who were of Japanese heritage, were locked into concentration camps during WWII

• Blacks were not allow to attend the same schools as other races throughout much of the USA until the late 1960s

• It is still legal to discriminate against Gay & Lesbians and most states have voted in laws that will prevent a legal union of these couples.

Clearly the Blue Laws were enacted because Protestants in SC and other states saw Sunday as a day of rest as dictated by the Bible and they wanted time off to go and worship at their churches. Many mainstream religions, but minority religions in SC, don't view Sunday in the same light, so you have an example of the majority creating a law that respects a particular religion. Is it worth fighting over, probably not. The laws will disappear because the majority now feels it is more important to shop than to have time off for church.

Is there a better system in terms of protecting everyone's rights. Possibly. The Soviets attempted to eliminate religion from society. While it prevented people from worshiping freely, their record on equal opportunity was much better than that in the USA.

[Chickenwing]

Is there a better system in terms of protecting everyone's rights. Possibly. The Soviets attempted to eliminate religion from society. While it prevented people from worshiping freely, their record on equal opportunity was much better than that in the USA.

And it turned out to be a dismal failure economically as well.

[monsoon]

And it turned out to be a dismal failure economically as well.

I think anyone with any education, I hope, knows what happened to the Soviet Union. The point was that in eliminating religion they eliminated a major component of discrimination and offered more opportunites to minorities. Their economic failure occured for reasons not related to this.

An argument can certainly be made that the system we have, which concentrates 95% of the nation's wealth in just 5% of the people hands, and where social status is determined by materialism, is not itself a failure. The only difference is the people here are still satisfied with the status quo in their "belief" that we have the best system in the world. Most are preparing to spend the next few weeks in a shopping frenzy on junk they will then spend the next year paying off. They are trapped in the system and don't even know it.

Isn't that the whole point to relaxing the blue laws? i.e. Shopping is now more important than anything else. Even more important than voting.

[Chickenwing]

Most are preparing to spend the next few weeks in a shopping frenzy on junk they will then spend the next year paying off. They are trapped in the system and don't even know it.

Isn't that the whole point to relaxing the blue laws? i.e. Shopping is now more important than anything else. Even more important than voting.

So maybe instead of getting rid of the blue laws, we should expand them to more days? Protect people from themselves!

Other than maybe a home, my philosophy is that if you cannot pay for it (meaning right then), then you cannot afford it. It has served me pretty well.

[krazeeboi]

York County has suspened the blue laws for one year, effectively immediately.

[waccamatt]

I can't believe those counties still have blue laws. Richland County ditched them years ago.

[flotown]

Florence intersects two interstates and still holds on to the silly blue laws. I'm more bothered by the blue laws that do not allow alcohol to be served or bought on Sunday.

They're building new hotels and restaurants left and right near our interstate exits. Yet when the tourists stay over on Sunday and attempt to get a drink, they're declined (or often told they'll need to drive 30 miles to the NC border). This makes SC look like a backwoods, hick state, which in some ways it is. As someone who waited tables here 15+ years ago, things I heard included "I guess slavery is still legal here too" and "Do any of the lawmakers here have teeth". I'm sure things haven't changed (although the insults I have likely gotten worse, and are being scattered over all 50 states).

I live in SC but I have no defense when others call this a backward, fundamentalist state. You can't buy beer or liquor on Sunday, so you load up on Saturday and probably end up drinking twice what you normally would. The fact that this is still a law in a state that wishes to attract industry and to be taken seriously by the rest of the country is amazing.

Almost as amazing is the fact that Myrtle Beach will not be connected to an interstate until 2014 at the earliest, but that's another thread about the incompetence of narrow-minded SC legislators.

[Spartan]

Florence intersects two interstates and still holds on to the silly blue laws. I'm more bothered by the blue laws that do not allow alcohol to be served or bought on Sunday.

They're building new hotels and restaurants left and right near our interstate exits. Yet when the tourists stay over on Sunday and attempt to get a drink, they're declined (or often told they'll need to drive 30 miles to the NC border). This makes SC look like a backwoods, hick state, which in some ways it is. As someone who waited tables here 15+ years ago, things I heard included "I guess slavery is still legal here too" and "Do any of the lawmakers here have teeth". I'm sure things haven't changed (although the insults I have likely gotten worse, and are being scattered over all 50 states).

I live in SC but I have no defense when others call this a backward, fundamentalist state. You can't buy beer or liquor on Sunday, so you load up on Saturday and probably end up drinking twice what you normally would. The fact that this is still a law in a state that wishes to attract industry and to be taken seriously by the rest of the country is amazing.

Almost as amazing is the fact that Myrtle Beach will not be connected to an interstate until 2014 at the earliest, but that's another thread about the incompetence of narrow-minded SC legislators.

I am fairly certain that the blue laws are at the county-level. Some counties and many cities in SC have removed them. While I wouldn't expect visitors to know that, I think its important to recognize that in reality its a reflection on the community rather than the state.

[digital_sandlapper]

I think anyone with any education, I hope, knows what happened to the Soviet Union. The point was that in eliminating religion they eliminated a major component of discrimination and offered more opportunites to minorities. Their economic failure occured for reasons not related to this.

An argument can certainly be made that the system we have, which concentrates 95% of the nation's wealth in just 5% of the people hands, and where social status is determined by materialism, is not itself a failure. The only difference is the people here are still satisfied with the status quo in their "belief" that we have the best system in the world. Most are preparing to spend the next few weeks in a shopping frenzy on junk they will then spend the next year paying off. They are trapped in the system and don't even know it.

Isn't that the whole point to relaxing the blue laws? i.e. Shopping is now more important than anything else. Even more important than voting.

For those of us who want all blue laws abolished, shopping is not the point. Not being able to buy a bottle of wine at the supermarket because its against the law is what is ludicrous. Should buying something from a merchant--something they WANT me to buy--be against the law one day of the week? Give me one good reason why this should be. BTW, this just happened to me in Columbia, so Richland County's relaxing of the Blue Laws (liquor stores are still not open in rural areas, or anywhere in the state for that matter, on Sundays) doesn't apply to municipalities. Don't forget that we are still eons from ALL counties, cities, etc. getting around to banishing the silly laws, if ever.

In Charleston, however, I could have bought that bottle of wine because it's now legal to do so on a Sunday from a grocery store. Since I just moved from there to here (Columbia), I forgot about it being Sunday and Columbia for a moment. When I was turned away at the checkout, I was embarrassed. Not only because the whole damn thing is ridiculous, but because I AM a native of the "Blue Law State", and not some newcomer to our strange laws, and couldn't believe I forgot. Of course, the checkout girl and the store manager both shared my disbelief that the dumb law hadn't somehow disappeared overnight and sympathized with me . . but I still felt dumbfounded as I walked out of Publix that day empty-handed.

BTW, I think going to church on Sunday is great. But why can't I do both? I'm Episcopalian, and would love to be able to stop by the liquor store on the way home from church if I need to save a trip later. Just having that choice would be nice. (And no, I'm not an alcoholic!)

[Spartan]

Just so long as you arent stopping for liquor on the way to church

[krazeeboi]

^Unless it's for Communion (Eucharist).