Morality Vs Legality

Law and morality are extrinsically linked and have been used interchangeably since ancient times. However, we can find differences between law and morality, taking into account several main factors. Sociologically: Without morals, social life is almost impossible. The main difference between law and morality is that law refers to the set of rules and regulations applied by the state to regulate human behavior in society, while morality refers to the ethical code of conduct for a person. Therefore, moral goods are the basis of the law, while morality is ensured by living according to the law. As society evolves and opinions change, so does what is considered moral. If you look back in history, there are many examples of laws that were clearly immoral by today`s standards. Among other things, the United States stole Native American land, enslaved blacks, and discriminated against homosexuals. As society becomes more informed and open, citizens demand that their laws reflect their new definition of what is moral. While not everyone agrees with the decisions, changing the laws is a big step toward changing general social views. The amendment to the law provides the company with the new definition of what is acceptable. Law and morality interact with each other and often cause each other`s change. Ultimately, when laws are unjust or outdated, people must stand up and fight for what is right.

Law and morality are interconnected, as they both share the same goal of raising moral standards and, eventually, people`s lives. The main difference between law and morality is that law refers to the set of rules and regulations applied by the state to regulate human behavior in society, while morality refers to the ethical code of conduct for a person. In addition, penalties for violation of these penalties are applied by law, while there is no application of such penalties in morality for committing immoral acts. Thus, unlike the law, morality rules and regulations are not mandates or actions. Instead, they are beliefs and practices. Etiquette – rules of conduct in areas of relatively minor importance, but which contribute to quality of life. Violations of these rules can lead to social censorship. Etiquette deals with the rules regarding clothing and table manners and deals with politeness. Violations would result in denunciations like RUDE or GROB or GROSS.

Friendships probably wouldn`t collapse because of violating these rules, as they would if they violated the rules of morality, such as lies and broken promises! These rules are not just “invented by a bunch of old Britons”, as one student has already volunteered in class. But they are made by people to promote a better life. In every society there are authorities in this area and there are collections of such rules. Many books are sold every year to brides-to-be who want to follow the right rules of decency and etiquette. There are newspapers that appear regularly with questions and answers on these topics. Whether the positivists or their “moralistic” opponents are right about the nature of the law, everyone seems to agree about the nature of morality. We must, it is said for the common good, distinguish between conventional morality and critical morality. The first consists of proposals supported by social consensus; The latter consists of statements affirmed as objective truth.

Regardless, morality, like the law, consists of statements—standards that we violate or follow. Moreover, morality appeared before ideal laws. Therefore, morality influenced the emergence of laws in a community or country. 1. “802301” (CC0) via Pixabay2. “A sailor is stripped up to the tail, tied to a ladder and bein Wellcome V0041675” By Welcome Images (CC BY 4.0) via Commons Wikimedia3. Image from page 42 of “The Doctrine of Morality: or, A View of Human Life, According to the Stoick Philosophy of Internet Archive Book Images” via Flickr4. “Moral Compass” by Paul Downey (CC BY 2.0) via Flickr So ethics and morals are not the same thing! A person is moral if he follows moral rules. A person is immoral if he violates moral rules. A person is amoral if he does not know or care about moral rules.

However, morality also greatly influences the emergence of laws. For example, crimes and other acts that are identified as illegal by law are those that are identified by morality as immoral. Therefore, morality is the basis for the emergence of laws. One possible lens is the distinction between legality and morality. An act or law can be both legal and moral, but what is legal is not always legal. Slavery, Jim Crow, the internment of the Japanese, and the expulsion of Native Americans from ancestral lands were all legal, but no one would dispute that they were moral. Similarly, actions that people would call morally right are not always legal. Many will argue that removing a child from an abusive home would be morally correct, even if it would be legally considered abduction in most states. This conflict between morality and legality runs through the entire conversation about immigration. Proponents often argue that it is morally necessary to allow those fleeing persecution and violence, children, and other vulnerable groups to seek asylum in the United States, and that immigration laws should reflect this. Others want stricter laws to prevent more people from entering the country.

In addition, the law punishes those who break the law and create discrepancies for the lives of others, while there are no such coercive sanctions for those who live immorally or commit immoral acts. However, morality emphasizes that any immoral action is followed by negative consequences that the actor must one day suffer. This is only one of many mysteries about the relationship between the domains of legality and morality, but it indicates a significant source of conflict and confusion. I can say that I do not agree with the person who participated in the discussion on the clinical case and who said that laws are the end of the story. That`s not all. Therefore, social concepts such as ethics, religious teachings, etc. have a direct impact on the creation of moral standards in a particular community or country. Therefore, it is these social concepts that formulate morality, as opposed to the law formulated by the state. However, law and morality are not the same thing.

On the one hand, the law is binary, which means that an act is legal or illegal. But morality is full of gray areas. For example, stealing bread is illegal for any reason, but most people are more sympathetic when made to feed hungry orphans than as a random act of theft. In addition, the law is enforced by state actors such as the police and courts, and penalties are provided for violators. Morality is not formally regulated, although there can certainly be social consequences for immoral acts. After all, the law is the same for all citizens, but morality depends on who you ask, because everyone has a different perspective and experience. Keep these similarities and differences in mind as we define exactly what legal and moral means. The law is enforced by the governing bodies of a country; State or community, as long as there is no such important body for enforcing moral codes; However, they are followed by those taught by religious teachings and social ethics. Therefore, it is a difference between law and morality.

Sanctions and penalties are also a big difference between law and morality. There are direct punishments for those who break the law, while there are no such direct penalties for those who commit immoral acts. The law is direct and crude with penalties, while morality may or may not be followed depending on the person`s choice. However, it is this quality of the law that ensures people`s morality. So this is another difference between law and morality. Hart distinguishes four general questions about the relationship between morality and law (LLM, 1-4). First, what are the historical relationships between the two? How has morality influenced law and vice versa? Second, there is an analytical or necessary relationship between law and morality; In other words, does the definition or concept of law contain a reference to morality or part of it? Third, is the law morally justifiable? This question concerns the moral criticism or evaluation of all or part of the law. Fourth, should the law be used to uphold and support the positive morality of society? This chapter deals with the second problem. To solve it, one of Hart`s main problems in legal philosophy must be solved, namely the similarities and differences between legal and moral obligation. The relationship between law and morality has become the central question of jurisprudential reflection of our time. Those who call themselves positivists argue to H.L.A.

Hart that calling a law or court decision a “law” does not necessarily affect the morality of that law or decision. Valid laws can be immoral or unjust. Those who oppose this reduction of the right to valid ordinances sometimes argue with Lon Fuller that moral acceptance is a necessary condition for accepting that a law is a law; or, with Ronald Dworkin, that moral principles complement valid ordinances as components of the law. What is the relationship between morality and law? Well, if enough people think something is immoral, they will work to have a law that forbids it and punishes those who do it. Morality is believed to have existed since the beginning of the human species. However, it is widely accepted that religion has cemented morality as an essential social construct. Thanks to common religions, it became common for people to adhere to norms of behavior that had serious consequences. Thus, religion and morality have been passed down from generation to generation and place, and although they have been different for different people, morality has become a central element of society.