The Instigator
MikeDennison666
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Matt_L
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

Morals is more important than law to an extent

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Matt_L
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/20/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 760 times Debate No: 40931
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)

 

MikeDennison666

Pro

Morals is more important than laws to an extent. If someone is being bullied for example and teachers are not helping or anyone else someone should have the right to stand up to the bully and confront him without the police convicting him as a felon. However if it goes to far like killing or breaking bones than the police should do something. We have a right to defend our selves and others instead of letting the police handle every little problem we have.
Matt_L

Con

Two questions regarding your first statement: 1) What would you say is the basis for people's morals and 2) What gives anyone the right to be above the law?
Debate Round No. 1
MikeDennison666

Pro

MikeDennison666 forfeited this round.
Matt_L

Con

I apologize if I wasn't very clear.
With my first question I was trying to understand whether you believe that morals are innate or learned. I think question two was quite clear.
Debate Round No. 2
MikeDennison666

Pro

MikeDennison666 forfeited this round.
Matt_L

Con

1) Let's say that morals are learned. Not everyone is going to be taught the same when it comes to right and wrong. It all depends on what religion/belief a person subscribes to. If your religion teaches that killing someone because they offended you is the right thing to do, then that's the direction your morals will go.

2) No matter how morals are imbued, there is no basis for the belief that people will always follow these morals.

3) Perhaps morals could be more important in some cases (such as bullying), but where do you draw the line? When do the people step down and let the law take over?
Debate Round No. 3
MikeDennison666

Pro

MikeDennison666 forfeited this round.
Matt_L

Con

This will be a bit of a expansion of point two from my last argument.

Let's that morals are innate. Even if everyone has the same natural ideas of right and wrong, not everyone is going to follow these ideas. If they did, then there would be no need for any sort enforced restrictions to be placed on a society.
Debate Round No. 4
MikeDennison666

Pro

MikeDennison666 forfeited this round.
Matt_L

Con

I'm sorry that pro did not see the need to complete his own debate. It had the potential to be very interesting.

To sum up by argument: Laws have been put into place because people do not consistently live morally.
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Kumquatodor 3 years ago
Kumquatodor
@Funwiththooughts:

Who's morals?
Posted by funwiththoughts 3 years ago
funwiththoughts
Ideally, laws should reflect morals.
Posted by ti_360 3 years ago
ti_360
Your argument is illogical, the morals you have addressed do not contradict with the law.
Good luck finding somebody to debate with.
Posted by Zalkida 3 years ago
Zalkida
Romanii,
Exactly why laws are needed. Basic human nature, when left to run unchecked, will not end with benefit to society. However, morals can, theoretically, be re-written, either through devotion to religion or extreme nationalism, and perhaps some other ways I have not considered. This is the goal of any societal structure theory that does not want influence by government, such as Taoism. This, as far as I can tell, can only ever be a theory as the basic human selfishness will prohibit any progress. Laws are the only way, other than, as I said, extreme devotion to either country or religion, to control a group, such as a country. The morality of individual religions varies, and thus only works if 100% of the population agrees, while nationalism needs something/someone to rally behind.
Posted by Romanii 3 years ago
Romanii
We wouldn't NEED laws if everyone had good morality.
Too bad that barely anyone does...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by tylergraham95 3 years ago
tylergraham95
MikeDennison666Matt_LTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Full FF by pro. Only arg posted was cons. Pro had a major grammatical error.