-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Legalism
- Thread starter Fool
- Start date
morally
The Emperor of Mankind
Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
Yes. Not all laws are moral ones. Laws that call for the persecution of others or cause segregation are immoral so following them does not make a person moral. The law does not dictate morality.
what about someone stealing; if they are hungry? If someone stills oranges from my orchard and they are hungry, should I report them?
They're your oranges, it's your call.
Carl W.
Member
If I caught someone stealing food from me out of
hunger I'd GIVE them food and try to help them not
become hungry again.
I just couldn't cause harm to anyone starving.
Now if some miscreant persists in stealing without
just cause.......................................
I'm sooooooo highly skilled in armed conflict and unarmed
defense.
THAT is an absolute last resort.
Which law?
McBell
Unbound
Yes
Carl W.
Member
Yup. You bet your bippy.
any law. If I take my wife to the hospital and breaking the speeding limit, should I get a ticket?
This question has nothing to do with the first question you asked.
McBell
Unbound
Not enough information to answer the question.
If you are taking your wife to a scheduled appointment that you have known about for weeks, yes.
If you are taking your wife to the ER because you think she is having a heart attack, perhaps not.
oh but it can. it shows the difference between legalism and survival, or failure of society to have common sense and what it is to be human, compassionate.
Carl W.
Member
NO!
Most, hopefully the vast majority of officers would
likely help you get there safely.
But like people everywhere there are anal orifices
everywhere.
Here also.
McBell
Unbound
The difference being where the harm is done and why
The Emperor of Mankind
Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
That's a very good question. A person stealing your oranges would reduce the amount of money you get from selling them and consequently you and/or your dependants might go hungry as a result. Which could in turn lead to them needing to steal to eat.
If you're open to suggestions on where this thread should go, may I suggest that it might be more at home in the Philosophy section as your questions about morality & law and which affects which seem like they belong there more than in the section for debating religions? I was going to ask you privately but apparently I can't.
I think @Fool is asking us if it would be more moral of him to let someone steal from him and impact his own needs (and those of any dependants he might have) or more moral to report the man for theft and as a result ensure he stays hungry (assuming he doesn't get 'three hots and a cot'). So the sort of answer you've given doesn't seem entirely helpful or pertinent.
McBell
Unbound
Then the question becomes is it ever moral to allow an immoral action?
There's a difference in perspective. Your first question addressed the person who is choosing to break a law or not. The second question addressed the person deciding whether to punish the first person, given that the law has been broken. They're different perspectives with different factors at work.
For instance, maybe the man rushing his wife to the hospital could have avoided the need for the hospital at all by removing sources of injury risk from the home or encouraging her to get routine check-ups. They could even spend their spare time in the hospital (volunteering, perhaps) so that if the need for the hospital arose, they'd already be there and there would be no need to break any speed limits to get there.
I'm not clear how you intended your first question. I can interpret it two ways:
- "Is what is legal necessarily moral?"
- "Is it possible to be moral while always obeying the law?"
In either case, the answer is "depends on the law." However, neither one necessarily has anything to do with the question of how the law should respond when someone feels compelled to break it.