>>I can "see" all the competing [legal] claims like force fields, and work them out like puzzles.... Getting all emotional about the force fields seems to me like getting all emotional about forces of nature - it's pointless.<<
Interesting, Blue. I can see the fascination here.
At the same time, I wonder whether the force fields (i.e., the competing claims) are really comparable to forces of nature. The former cannot be changed, but the latter can, or at least the laws on which they are based can be.
I suspect there is a real difference between lawyers (or would-be lawyers) and non-lawyers. Lawyers are inclined to say "well, that's the law," or to say "there ain't no such law" -- that is, they accept whatever there is, or isn't, whether they like it or not, because they have to work within the framework of the given. Non-lawyers are more apt to say "There oughtta be a law!" when there isn't one, or, if there is one, to denounce it as unfair and to work for its repeal.
Am I on track?
Joan |
