Basis of law?

Discussion in 'Politics and Society' started by Dogbrain, Feb 24, 2010.

  1. Dogbrain

    Dogbrain New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    813
    Likes Received:
    0
    Should morality be a fundamental basis of law?
     
  2. wil

    wil UNeyeR1 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    22,039
    Likes Received:
    2,060
    Isn't it already. But also undefinable as there is no universal standard it exists based on culture?
     
  3. shawn

    shawn New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    0
    weights and measures are standardized....why not values and morals.
    We, as a species, really need to stop procrastinating on this one.
    If some people don't like it.....too bad.
    Any real significant change for the better is always going to piss off somebody no matter how hard you try to accommodate them all.
     
  4. Dogbrain

    Dogbrain New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    813
    Likes Received:
    0
    How do we go about "standardizing" these values and morals? Do we use a "democratic" method or do we have it imposed by some sort of oligarchy?
     
  5. wil

    wil UNeyeR1 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    22,039
    Likes Received:
    2,060
    I really see our global issue of one of have's and have nots, of prosperity and growth.

    We in the US only got rid of slaves 150 years ago...gave women the vote last century...dropped segregation and started equal rights for blacks 50 years ago...50 years ago marrying a 14 year old was still ok with parent's consent...and only started deciding to provide for our disabled even more recent than that.

    Our issue is as we have only become somewhat enlightened to these concepts in the very near past...suddenly we expect the rest of the world to be the same way.

    Europe still thinks we are barbaric with our guns and death penalties... We think others are barbaric with stoning and cutting off appendages (despite the fact that many here in this country vocalize thoughts of doing the very same to others)

    Its all relative. And we really can't expect others to think like we when most of their nation wonders where the next meal will come from....and isn't safe in the streets.
     
  6. Thomas

    Thomas Administrator Admin

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2003
    Messages:
    11,741
    Likes Received:
    2,125
    I agree with him! (Hi, Wil).

    I would suggest morality is the basis of law, but it's all relative. Take the age of consent — 21? 18? 16? ... and in other cultures, much younger.

    Here in the UK we're having a huge debate about the freedom of faith schools to teach their faith, when what they believe does not conform to what secular society wants us to believe — birth control, same-sex union, euthenasia, assisted suicide.

    The opinion seems to be that when faith and secularism contradict, then the faith should be silenced, which is 'secular fundamentalism' revealed.

    It was interesting to hear a Muslim cleric bring out the obvious contradiction of the secular position.

    The main thrust of the argument, that faith schools inculcate homophobia, that resisting contraception and abortion increases unplanned pregnancy, population proliferation, the spread of disease, etc., is a straw-man argument, and in many ways ill-founded.

    What was really interesting was the Muslim cleric who suggested that teaching the secular position, and the faith position, means the child can make informed decisions.

    The secular response was, of course, that the faith position is presented as right and seeks to sway the argument to its own position.

    The reverse of the coin, of course, is that the secular position posits only one side of the argument (theirs), so the child is not fully informed, but in fact kept ignorant of opposing moral positions or moral values ... and therefore discreetly inculcated into the secular position.

    The secular really is the far more dogmatic and fundamentalist position.

    Gandhi, for example, was against birth control, and taught the idea of 'continence' and 'abstinence' ... these notions have all but disappeared from the secular lexicon, and when they do appear, are regarded as risible.

    More and more, secularism judges humanity from a purely pragmatic and utilitarian perspective, and works hand in hand with its influencers, business, economics, etc., to render man nothing but a unity of economic value to be disposed off when no longer useful.

    Thomas
     
  7. shawn

    shawn New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    0
    Only to make women legally "PERSONS" which is the new form of slavery.
    Only thing is now all, no matter what color you are, are the same...we are equally slaves.
    Really great progress there.
    ...
    The byproduct of our plantation politics.
    We are all slaves and so you should not be astonished to find that you are considered as a thing to be used and discarded when done with.
     

Share This Page