Lies, Damn Lies

The difference between law and morality

I think that most of us would agree that law and morality are not necessarily the same thing- we can all tink of examples of injust laws, probably in our own countries, if we think hard enough. In fact, I would go further than this, and claim that a law can be moral and it CAN be moral to break it. A simple example is surely the speed limit- certainly in towns it is set as low as it is to save lives, but also on motorways, apparently as cars go above 70 mph the amount they pollute increases rapidly (I admit I heard some minister or other say this, and have not seen any evidence, but suppose it to be true for sake of argument). So it would be moral to keep it at 70 to reduce pollution. But suppose one needed to get to a hospital, or some such important event- in that case I do not think it would be immoral to go faster than the speed limit.

This, incidentally, is why we should be a little more cautious about changing law. Often the media will present an anecdotal answer about where the law has let someone down, and imply this means the law should be changed. But one has to think of the consequences- perhaps to save this one person we would end up hurting hundreds other. The law is a heavy, blunt instrument, and should generally be set where it helps the most people. If it is not doing that, then there is something wrong. One can often, however, make slight changes in the way one applies a law rather than changing that law.

Which leads me to torture. Now I have had arguments with some in the past about torture. The thing is, it seems easy to deplore torture from a detatched point of view. But suppose, say, you knew, or at least highly expected that someone knew the location of a loved one they had kidnapped, and time was running out. Wouldn't you torture them? I'm not necessarily implying electro shocking, but you might well hit them, to get the information faster. The same applies to the classic hypothetical of the ticking bomb, and the only person who knows where it is. You probably might try to beat the information out of them. This does not necessarily mean it is right from a moral high ground point of view, but it is, perhaps, more excusable. However, torture should still definitely be illegal. As soon as you allow a loophole, that power will be abused, because thats what happens. What you can do is the same that happens with murder- sentencing can be different. So where circumstances might have led to desperate measures, there might be a lesser sentence, perhaps not much of one at all in very extreme cases. But it must be illegal. One must know even as one engages what one is doing that it is forbidden by law, and their actions become all the more serious because of it.

posted by Mr K @ 5:03 pm