|
|
 Originally Posted by wufwugy
I'm not asking why the practice has utility. I'm asking why you claim on one hand that something can be immoral regardless of the law but then claim that something else can be immoral only within the confines of law.
How can theft be immoral outside the confides of law when theft doesn't exist outside the confides of law?
We could have this very same argument about murder. If you kill someone who is going to kill you, is it murder? The law says no, because the law says muder is the unlawful killing of someone, and you are within your legal rights to protect yourself. Take away law, and muder no longer exists, because one can no longer kill someone unlawfully.
The law does not reflect morality for one critical reason... morality is subjective. What I find immoral, another person might not. There is no such subjectiveness in law. Something is either unlawful or it is not.
|
Reply With Quote