Amazon.com Widgets
  • We are morally obliged to follow laws.

    I feel that we are morally obliged to follow laws, since many laws are derived from morals. I believe that laws and morals go hand in hand, and both help to keep us safe within the confines of a society. If we didn't follow laws then there could be anarchy within a society.

  • It depends, but generally yes.

    Personally, I think the question does not make sense because morals are personal values by which you live. (Ethics are of course different; they are standards by which you treat others.) But my individual morals do demand that I obey the law. The laws are for the general welfare and my obeying of them will be good for society.

  • Yes, following laws is part of morality.

    Generally, immorality is defined by many people based upon laws. If someone is doing something illegal, it is generally considered to be immoral. Also, for people who follow Christianity, Jesus taught that it is sinful to not follow laws. Therefore, almost everyone would agree that we are morally obligated to follow the laws that have been written.

  • Not today in this fascist country

    First off, let me state that Government has no ability to change morality. Killing will be wrong whether government says so. Secondly, the way our government is abusing its power, it would be moral to obey their fascist laws, which only oppress the people at large. I believe the only moral laws that advocate stability and freedom. Other than that, no law is worth obeying

  • No, you are not morally obliged to follow laws!

    People are not morally obliged to follow laws because laws are superfluous in achieving their alleged ends. On the count of being unnecessary, this can be seen from the consideration that if laws are meant to provide a framework for moral behavior, then laws are insufficient because there are other means of achieving that goal (e.G. Fables, self-interest) and furthermore, laws are usually written in such a way that they only inform citizens about what to do or not to do, rather than why you should or shouldn't do something (e.G. A law dictating "do not cross" tells people nothing about why one shouldn't cross because it could cause physical injury to those who are crossing). As such, the truly efficient means by which to yield moral harmony is through providing information concerning the ethical aspects of situations, rather than simply (and quite often) as well as brutally dictating them.

  • No, Morality Is Higher Than and Separate From Law

    So the yes column, then people who hid Jews during the Holocaust were being immoral? The Nazis who gassed them were just "following the law"?

    Morality is separate from and higher than the law. When the law is good and just it is a reflection of morality and during good times such as those people often start confusing the two so that once some bad laws are passed they don't notice and give them their rubberstamp approval of morality. Morality is about the relationships between people and about help and harm. It's not about the enforced opinions of a group of people who hold a monopoly on the use of force. Such a monopoly is necessary, but its dictates do not magically turn into what's right and wrong. To equate law with morality is essentially to say that might is right.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.