Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (47390)	4/7/2006 7:07:01 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Even when societies opinion of right and wrong comes about in response to a law, the two things (the opinion and the law) are different things, just highly compatible. Often it works the other way around and the law will come about in response to those established notions. Also you can get a situation where the law is in conflict with such notions. You said " You are aware that the law defends the moral standards of a community. " and I responded "Some of the law some of the time, but much of, perhaps the majority of law has little to do with defending the moral standards of a community, and even when the law does defend such standards the standards are not always appropriate." and later added "I would add that laws and regulations often do not comply with either the consensus or majority opinion and at times do not comply with the constitution. I'm not sure that those laws and regs could be said to comply to "established sanctioned codes or accepted notions of right and wrong"." Yes they can comply. You could list quite a few examples of laws that are constitutional, popular, and compatible with societies notions about right and wrong. But there is no automatic connection with any one of these concepts and any of the others.