Now this post might go into a bit of ethics but i thought it would be best placed here.
When i think of law i think of the reason the law was written. Most of the laws are completely understandable when it comes to why they were created. The thing is, the law provides for a general rule that will cover every possible negative and therefore even restricting you from at times doing things that you know will not turn out bad. What i mean by this is that the law doesn't have any exceptions and a perfect example of this is when you come to a intersection in a street and no one could be around you for miles, if the light is red, you have to wait even though if you know, can prove, and even if the authorities know that you are not putting youself or anyone in danger any more than you would be following the law. If you run the light, your breaking the law and then could be arrested.
Are you a person that follows the literal law without question to get through life as easily as possible or are you a person that when sees an opportunity as mentioned above and know for certain you will not get caught, you will break it?
If you were to break the law, nothing bad happened or even came close to happening, and no one was around to see it, would you consider that right? Would you consider the law restricting in many cases despite the possible positives that could come break occasionally breaking it when you see fit?
My point is that do your morals strictly tell you to follow the law or to trust yourself to make the right decisions as opposed to the authorities who are at times not always right in what they do, obviously their intentions are always supposedly good.
I know one of the main reasons for this strict and no exceptions law system is to engrave a strong influence into people's decision making and i recognise that.
My answer would probably be that I follow the letter of the law. Yes, I'm one of those people who stop at deserted intersections - and I know it annoys some people. For my part, I have two reasons for this:
[INDENT]1. Its arrogant and presumptuous of me to assume that I know why these laws are made. If I conclude that I *DO* know, then decide when it's OK to break the law, I'm placing myself into a position of authority that's (1) likely untrue and (2) potentially dangerous.
2. Most laws, whether I agree with them or not, carry consequences for noncompliance. Now, of all the things I value most in this life one of the most dear to me is my freedom. Right or wrong, just or unjust, unless compliance is a BIG moral problem I'll not risk my freedom unless there's a really, really good reason.
[/INDENT]Yes there's a time to take a stand. Yes there are laws that can't seem to possibly have any good reason but by-and-large, the goals of the laws in place tend to be goals I share in; safety, security, due respect of property rights, etc. As far as "loving the government" goes, here's a few thoughts to consider:
- "The Government" is comprised of people; yes, your people. It's not a bloated, dank and dark monster sitting in some smoke-filled basement. It's a collection of YOUR fellow citizens who generally have the same "issues" as you do.
- For those elements of government that we can affect and/or influence through civic action we have but TWO choices: Accept, understand and comply -or- Work within the system to change. Those that rail against their local or federal governments because they're just pissed at life in general - yet do nothing about it - spread angst without hope for relief.
But yes; this is an excellent topic and one salient to our daily lives. Thanks
it simply seeks to judge the act itself and not it's intended purpose.Quote:
Well said, i think you truly hit the point there. And i do understand why our system has been set up like this and it is very reasonable to do so. I maybe am expecting too much out of our law because it would have to be perfect to precisely address every single right and wrong possible. To me, the law seems like too much of a serious matter to not be completely perfect. People's lives and future depend on the law and therefore the situaton needs to be handled with care. Our law is built around the idea that the system needs broad coverage. This because we cannot draw out every possible scenario so we need laws that cover the generalized set of issues. Therefore, since our law is very general it may miss a few cases here and there, and that is what bothers me. You may be resticted in some way for something you are doing that isn't wrong at all, maybe even good, but because the law must be followed literally, your faced with the dilemma.