Yup. The holocaust was legal. Slavery was legal. Hiding Jews (to help them escape the holocaust) was illegal. The Underground Railroad (to help slaves escape the south) was illegal. Legality often aligns with morality, but legality cannot be used as a basis for morality. Because throughout history, people have used laws to justify heinously immoral acts.
“I took six parking spots, three handicapped, as a moral and political position and statement. As such my actions are protected political speech and unless you are duly sworn in by the coast guard you can’t do shit you see that gold fringe on my license placard? I answer only to the Admiralty Board. Now agents of corporate have put three boots on and a glued this mermaid titty clamp onto the front of my primary turbine familiar domicile conveyance and I mailed them a quit and go away deed. They ain’t quit and go away. What words I need put on my quit and go away deed?”
Oh God you can’t imagine the shit that I get into the minute somebody mentions morality and I asked them whose morality are you talking about. I live in a very highly religious area and the looks people give me is hilarious. Seriously fuck their thought of what morality is or isn’t.
I do. And you do. That’s the neat thing. Best societies are ones where each person’s voice carries the same weight in deciding that shit, but that’s an ideal and those don’t exist (the assumptions that would have to exist for that to happen just aren’t currently happening. Or likely possible). But like, it happens via conversation about morality and law and where they align
When were talking about simple ass shit that we probably barely need a legal system to deal with, sure.
Don’t kill, don’t steal, don’t rape, these are rules that every man of any creed can live by (sorry, had to)
But as soon as the law gets more complicated than “don’t visit violence on others unprovoked” it just becomes the state threating you to do what it wants
The people who hid Anne Frank and her family were guilty of obstruction, too.
Yup. The holocaust was legal. Slavery was legal. Hiding Jews (to help them escape the holocaust) was illegal. The Underground Railroad (to help slaves escape the south) was illegal. Legality often aligns with morality, but legality cannot be used as a basis for morality. Because throughout history, people have used laws to justify heinously immoral acts.
I’d say it “sometimes” does.
For the major crimes, yes.
Murder, theft, etc.
But for other crimes, like the one in the article, it’s moral to resist.
The vast majority of laws cover petty things that may or may not be moral rather than the big stuff, though.
“I took six parking spots, three handicapped, as a moral and political position and statement. As such my actions are protected political speech and unless you are duly sworn in by the coast guard you can’t do shit you see that gold fringe on my license placard? I answer only to the Admiralty Board. Now agents of corporate have put three boots on and a glued this mermaid titty clamp onto the front of my primary turbine familiar domicile conveyance and I mailed them a quit and go away deed. They ain’t quit and go away. What words I need put on my quit and go away deed?”
The vast majority of laws are regulations. And the vast majority of those were written in blood.
They can mostly be summed up as, “don’t do that, or do this specifically, because someone could die otherwise”.
The big ones, yes. A lot more are “Don’t do this because it isn’t in the best interests of those in power for one reason or another.”
The real question is: Who gets to define the morality that the law should align with?
The real answer is: the fey queen Titania and her sylvan council of woodland beings, duh.
Leaving King Oberon out of it? Admittedly those two do love to bicker.
Oh God you can’t imagine the shit that I get into the minute somebody mentions morality and I asked them whose morality are you talking about. I live in a very highly religious area and the looks people give me is hilarious. Seriously fuck their thought of what morality is or isn’t.
I do. And you do. That’s the neat thing. Best societies are ones where each person’s voice carries the same weight in deciding that shit, but that’s an ideal and those don’t exist (the assumptions that would have to exist for that to happen just aren’t currently happening. Or likely possible). But like, it happens via conversation about morality and law and where they align
It’s subjective. But the state of the world today lends a lot of credence to being cynical.
Next thing you know, that slippery slope has turned into an Anschluss!
How close is sometimes and often? Close enough, no?
“Often” means more than “sometimes.”
When were talking about simple ass shit that we probably barely need a legal system to deal with, sure.
Don’t kill, don’t steal, don’t rape, these are rules that every man of any creed can live by (sorry, had to)
But as soon as the law gets more complicated than “don’t visit violence on others unprovoked” it just becomes the state threating you to do what it wants