On Morality and Law

a reply to: VP740

Indeed, and who's survival is important?

You just brought up to many questions out of Pandora's box to deal with one at a time or even as a whole. The simpleness that my mortal mind would even attempt to deal with has morphed into a quandary of so many facets that I find myself running around in the maze of my own brain trying to accumulate it into something I can address.

For general principles of morals, I at least, need to work from abstract considerations rather than the always arguable specifics such as bugs and traffic lights. For me, all of those discussions lead to little more than ,'yeah buts".
My moral system stems from my own sense of my highest ideals and hopes. And of course I realize that my highest sense of things is not other peoples highest sense of things.

I think our human concocted morals should be a compromise of our simplest and highest held concept of virtue.

Bring the rule of law into question and society will crash down around our ears. Laws based off moral values have been enacted since Roman times. In fact, many jurisdictions are directly descended from the Roman rule of law. Granted, the legal landscape needs to keep up with changing times, and some laws have become obsolete as a result.

But Morality is subjective. Break a religious cardinal rule, God will punish you in accordance with your beliefs. The law is more universal, and definitely more of a deterrent. Break the law, society and or a jury of your peers will punish you. Some would say the ten commandments was the first example of religion being codified into common law. So yes, they're distantly related.

Going back to your original post, I don't see your point. Most laws were created from a common moral standing for the good of society as a whole. If there's a specific law you think is morally unjust, please enlighten us.