Experience is not normative. One person's experience is not
more rational or more complete than another person's enemies
experience. Despite this, people base their judgements,
decisions, and rationale on past experience when that experience
was incomplete.
This works often enough that people
continue to do it. It can even be successful for individuals as
long as they don't become perscriptive. If you take a decision
you've based on your prior experience and try to apply that
decision to other people (e.g. legislation, lobbying), you find
resistance because those other people have experience that is
different from yours.
Since the technique has been used
successfully in the past, people continue to trust it. Common
experience tells us that murder is bad, so we all agree that it
should be banned. We all want to live.
The technique fails
when there are different roles that we play. For example, the
"content industry" (e.g. Resellers of what Recording Artists
Produce (RIAA)) want to continue to make money selling other
people's music. They experience Napster as theft and attempt to
legislate against it. Many other people experience Napster as a
way to experience a broad range of music easily, so they become
incensed when the RIAA tries to legislate against their
experience.
All this blather because Shawn
thinks we should legislate against Churches.