The topic of Ethics (law) and Morals is a very important subject when talking about legislation.
(Some would argue morals are based on religious ideas and this is not necessarily true)
Morals: Principals and knowledge one believes to be correct in determining what’s right and wrong. Law: Expects all to follow the scope or and the outline displayed unto the public
Laws affect us all therefore, making them equally important as anything else.
Moral in sense of definition has a relationship with ethics because laws are ruled by these terms,
Unjust
Just
Unconstitutional
Constitutional
Question: The United States Supreme Court rules in favor of a law, does that make it right, wrong, good, bad, moral, immoral, just, unjust, unconstitutional, constitutional? EXPLAIN ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Extra discussion: What are your Morals built upon?
(All have morals, but not necessarily views of the Bible or any other religion)
I believe morals are born into us. We all (there’s always a small amount of anomalies) have a sense of what is right and wrong. For me personally I believe it is spiritual and I use the bible to guide my morals.
Laws are man made and therefore can be very flawed. Just because something is legal doesn’t make it morally correct. Same goes the other way just because it’s illegal doesn’t mean it’s morally wrong.
It’s always going to on a case by case basis and just because we may disagree on what is or is not moral doesn’t make us mortal enemies just means we disagree.
Great point!
I stand on Biblical principals myself, but wanted to leave the door open for all.
If we look back at the Declaration Of Independence than we can see it was founded upon morals and as perfect as I would argue it to be, it’s not flawless.
Anything man made is going to have flaws as I’m certain you are fully aware.
Thanks for sharing!
If it is to the letter of the law, I believe very few are mortal, or immoral. Now, my Christian faith, tells me “although all things be lawful unto me, not all things be expedient.” There are things that are “legal” yet I find them immoral. Take speech for example. It is legal to call someone an offensive term, but, it is not polite nor, IMHO, educated.
When the Supreme Court rules for the Constitutionality of a Law it becomes a LAW. Right wrong or indifferent. That the law conflicts with someone’s moral’s or ethical belief’s has no bearing on the LAW. The thing about Law’s are that they are the creation of man and can be changed by man which automatically removes them from infallibility.
I believe that you are born with your own set of morals, they are yours. Very few Morals are ever changed no matter what a person experiences or what religion they are exposed to it is who they are.
I believe that the family and the community impart your ethics to you through the process of example, observation and instruction.
There is one aspect that you may have missed. TRUTH’s as in
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
I love that particular scripture.
Well, If you recall Paul wrote it twice and only replacing a few words.
There are a lot of laws that are not moral…
For instance for this case it would be any law limiting guns because the person doing that is dis- honoring “Shall not infringe”
@Randall318 No Sir I don’t know you from Adam. That said I would submit you are either a Professor or a Student at the Masters level based on your commentary with a strong lean to religion which may or may not be part of your studies. Our government spent a lot of money to make me observant as well as to teach me a few other skills over the years.
In brief:
MORALS may be seen as rules which we as individuals set for ourselves to govern our behavior, and by which we may judge the behavior of others. (They may or may not be founded in religion, but that’s rarely a bad place to start. )
LAWS may be seen as “community morals”, proposed and agreed to by the community for the benefit of the community.
Another way to look at it is this: Morals give us a solid foundation to guide us when the unexpected happens. Laws seek to prevent the unexpected from happening in the first place.
Or: Laws give others permission to act against our morals.
Sir, I would like to say they did a fine job in doing so…
Therefore, I assume you are military? If so, thank you for your service and may God continue to bless you in each and every area of your life.
Furthermore, I’m a Pre-Law student, with my major being government although, my studies go back to 2012 as far as Biblical. I’ve studied the Bible in and out three or four times as a whole, but continue daily.
I participate in a Christian university that has a reputation for being conservative as well. (Actually, the most conservative school, but I’m aware some people would not like that… it’s my cup of tea)
Thank you for your input and, I would like to agree.
I would add to the topic that Laws have loopholes as of morals do not. However, not obeying certain laws for being unjust would go against morality because therefore you would be breaking the law. I agree with Steven Shavell in his idea that morals trump law because doing the right thing should always be our prime fade obligation(Shavell 2002, P. 221).
Although, we can’t always apply morals to law because you would not call the police because Susie broke her promise to you. In that statement, we have to concede to the suggestion that all laws do deserve moral insight, but can’t always be applied in every sense of law. As @Craig6 said and also in my study is law can be changed. Law is not perfect and should be changed when unjust or unconstitutional. Lastly, if certain laws get applied and the people don’t agree to almost a whole, it causes rebellion or revolution.
@Randall318, this statement would seem to imply that morals are perfect. Law can indeed be changed and that changability is given as evidence of of it imperfection. Yet morals also change, albeit more slowly and organically than the law.
For instance, in ancient times the institution of slavery was accepted as being moral, as were the acts of being a good slave or a good master. Over a great span of time, much of the world has come to see slavery as being deeply immoral; so much so that the utter immorality of slavery was offered as an unassailable argument against the laws which allowed it and why those laws had to be struck down.
It would seem, within these circumstances, that the moral code changed over time. What was once seen as a natural condition to be pursued in a moral manner is now seen as being immoral and unjusifiable.
On the other hand, one could argue that it was only our human perception (the only frame of reference we can possibly have) of morality which changed, not the morals themselves. But it also suggests that morals are beyond our ability to readily comprehend and therefore also beyond our ability to understand and apply properly.
This then begs the question: are morals a form of natural law, akin to gravity, which acts upon us with or without our knowledge or consent? Or are they an intrinsic aspect of human intelligence, constructed to restrain base instinct and allow mankind to rise above the state of brute animals? Is morality so fixedly embedded in our hindbrains that it gave rise to the concept of humans banding together to formulate and agree upon laws to further constrain our behavior?
My intentions were not to imply morals are perfect, but only to further indicate that law and morals run congruently.
Morals do in fact change over time although, they tend to only get better as of laws typically get worse. Laws have a whole list of things pertaining too why they get passed nonetheless lucrative incentives are the highest among them. However, morals only further make a person better therefore if one’s morals change more than likely it was for the better.
The argument for my own perspective on morals would be Biblically based likewise would insist that they were from God, but the scientific eye would not see that as fact. Laws in themselves derived from God’s law he gave Moses; yet again fact over theory, right?
Lastly, I can not give you the answers to those questions but, I only hope you may find them yourself. In regards to the topic, I further agree with Shavell in light of this statement,
“Any constitution without moral purpose even if different from the U.S. Constitution would be merely and arbitrarily pointless or meaningless formal document, establishing an equally pointless formal system.” (Shavell 2002, P. 223)
Some more worms for the can: Both morals and laws are at the whim of each individual and change when people as a whole are swayed one way or another by their own desire of what they want them to be. On the other hand, if there exists a standard of perfect righteousness that laws and morals can be based on, it becomes a matter of seeking to be in harmony with that standard regardless of how whims of people change. As for me personally, I believe that standard does indeed exist so now it is up to me to seek understanding of how that standard truly applies to my life - and then walk therein. Obviously, the road of legal and moral guidelines I adhere to will differ from someone who does not accept the same source of standard as myself, but at least I will have an unchanging basis to build my own existence on no matter what laws and morals are “whimmed up” I know, whimmed is not a legal dictionary word but I don’t think it is immoral
Exodus 3:14 - I Am That I Am John 14:6 I am the way, the truth, and the life
I thought about the fact of it getting out of hand and almost didn’t post it. However, should give light to law in regards to moral especially with all the legislation these days.
If the subject get out of hand I’ll flag it. I don’t want any trouble more than the next guy.
Agreed, I do tend to believe our views change and therefore our laws change along with morals.
“Whimmed” is a good choice of words for me. Are you from the south as well as myself? The reason being is that I’ve heard the word all my life and on Thanksgiving I’ll more than likely here it again!
Great perspective and, I believe all have been informal and to the point. I’m glad this conversation did not turn negative.
Thank you for stopping by, Miss Dawn. I believe our discussion is more academic than personal, and therefore less.likely to degrade into something outside of community standards.
Even if it is academic, someone could take it into the personal realm. I completely believe that the level of conversation here shows the respect and trust built in the Community and I am very thankful for you all for your help continuing to build it!
If by any chance something said was offensive, please forgive me.
I’m glad we could have this conversation. Moreover, with all the gun legislation it seemed like a logical topic for our community.
