Should laws mirror morality (of the majority) or should laws simply serve practical ends?
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Should laws mirror morality?
- Thread starter DarkProphet
- Start date
- Status
sidhe
Seemly Unseelie
- Sep 27, 2004
- 4,466
- 586
- 46
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Pagan
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
Laws should be practical. Enforced morality isn't real morality, and morality of the majority being given the force of law is tyranny of the majority.
Upvote
0
/agree
"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as they are injurious to others."
Upvote
0
Spherical Time
Reality has a well known Liberal bias.
- Apr 20, 2005
- 2,375
- 227
- 43
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- UK-Liberal-Democrats
Upvote
0
What or whose practical ends? How do we decide what they are? Do we listen to scientists, theologians...who?
Upvote
0
Spherical Time
Reality has a well known Liberal bias.
- Apr 20, 2005
- 2,375
- 227
- 43
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- UK-Liberal-Democrats
Upvote
0
sidhe
Seemly Unseelie
- Sep 27, 2004
- 4,466
- 586
- 46
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Pagan
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
I interpret that as things like:
No one likes having stuff stolen. Don't steal stuff.
Don't kill folks, as folks don't like dying.
You wouldn't like being raped. Don't do it.
Don't publicly defame the character of someone knowingly, that's just being a bastard.
Basically, if psychologists, theologians, and secular ethicists agree, on it, it's probably got some practical value.
Upvote
0
Verv
Senior Veteran
- Apr 17, 2005
- 7,278
- 673
- Country
- Korea, Republic Of
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Great question to which I have a terrible response:
It depends on the nature of the society and how they have agreed to found their government.
In the case of the United States: "No."
Upvote
0
QuakerOats
— ♥ — Living in Love — ♥ —
Laws should serve practical ends. I agree with sidhe.
Upvote
0
BobW188
Growling Maverick
Yes, but all are making moral judgments. You can't escape them.
You can argue that it is better to follow the morality of a majority, or that it is better to follow the morality of some better schooled and trained people, or to appoint a king...etc., etc., ad. inf., but in the end you are deciding what is right and what is wrong for a given society at a given place and time. All legislation is ultimately of morality.
You can argue that it is better to follow the morality of a majority, or that it is better to follow the morality of some better schooled and trained people, or to appoint a king...etc., etc., ad. inf., but in the end you are deciding what is right and what is wrong for a given society at a given place and time. All legislation is ultimately of morality.
Upvote
0
Spherical Time
Reality has a well known Liberal bias.
- Apr 20, 2005
- 2,375
- 227
- 43
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- UK-Liberal-Democrats
I disagree. Legality is not necessarily morality. And illegality is not necessarily immorality.
Upvote
0
sidhe
Seemly Unseelie
- Sep 27, 2004
- 4,466
- 586
- 46
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Pagan
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
Not really. Morality implies a right/wrong dichotomy. Laws have an allowed/not allowed dichotomy. For instance, you're allowed to kill someone in self-defense (given certain circumstances). You're NOT allowed to kill someone because they cut you off in traffic. You're allowed to have a beer. You're NOT allowed to have a beer while driving down the interstate.
Upvote
0
Morality is practical then. As a Christian I'd agree with you; it's not either/or. Maybe the OP needs to be restated.
Upvote
0
Robbie_James_Francis
May all beings have happiness and its causes
Not at all. It is entirely possible to keep issues of good and bad, that is morality, wholly separate from ideas of what is right and wrong within society. Such a distinction lies at the heart of every free nation in the world.
Everyone must be given as much freedom as possible to pursue whatever it is she considers to be good. Therefore, what is right is that which does not infringe on people's ability to pursue this (whatever it may be), and what is wrong is that which does.
They can conflict with one another in some ways. For example, if I believe the good in life is to ritually sacrifice as many people as possible in order to spiritually benefit from their death, I still cannot be permitted to do it, because doing so stops others' right to follow what they think is the good in their life. However, when society tells me I cannot do that it isn't saying my conception of the good is actually bad, just that it is wrong in society. So it doesn't matter if every single person in a sovereign nation-state believes ritual sacrifice to be good, it is still not right.
Until the day we can conclusively prove an absolute, comprehensive, perfect and unquestionable moral code for everyone, as far as any democratic society is concerned, within the civic sphere there is no such thing as good and bad. Those concepts exist within the minds of individuals, and between individuals there exist only rights not moral goods.
Even when people confuse the issues on this, the vast majority implicitly understand and firmly believe in it. Whether we know it or not, it is the fundamental reason that we consider, say, France 'free' but Saudi Arabia not. It is the reason we believe having sex in public can legitimately be criminalised, but having consensual sex in private cannot. It is the reason that slandering someone in the press can result in being sued, but swearing can't.
Upvote
0
Paulos23
Never tell me the odds!
- Mar 23, 2005
- 8,488
- 4,861
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
No, that is practical. It might go along with the society's morality, but it doesn't have to. We have learned by historical and practical experience that we should have leaders that are well educated and trained, since they get stuff done. We could elect a plummer to be President, and he could be a good leader, but we all know the odds are against it due to lack of education and training.
Some of our laws have been around so long that they have become part of the cultural morality (don't kill, don't steal, etc.). That doesn't make the laws moral (they are still practical) but it does mean that the society has excepted them as morals.
Upvote
0
Morality CAN be practical but not always. Take adultery for example, most non-Christians would agree that adultery is "immoral" but does that fact alone make it practical to make adultery illegal? Enforcing such a law would violate peoples basic freedoms and add little value to society for the cost.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
