Many people say, "The law is the law. Period." They say that people who break an evil law are worse that those who made it. Do you agree?
2007-04-09 08:14:23 · 28 answers · asked by Ray Eston Smith Jr 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I posted this question because so many people claim that they have nothing against immigration, they're just against illegal immigration. They say, "the law is the law." There may or may not be valid arguments for restricting immigration, but that isn't one of them.
Note: I wasn't even advocating any kind of civil disobedience - I was just questioning the morality of the immigration laws, but I got deluged with "the law is the law" answers. (THEN I responded with a quote from Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience").
2007-04-09 08:48:40 · update #1
No. I don't agree with those "law loving people".
2007-04-09 08:18:22 · answer #1 · answered by Avner Eliyahu R 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think we're kidding ourselves to think we can guess what we'd have done, because we totally ignore the societal influence on our thinking.
Personally, as a Libertarian, I'd like to think I'd have helped organize the escapes, but I'm not so sure. It's possible that I would have accepted the commonly held belief that the slaves were not human beings, and therefore not covered by my Libertarian principles. I can't honestly say.
It makes it harder to know because we've seen other instances of de-humanization before and after the mid 19th Century. Jews and Slavs were dehumanized in Germany in the 1930's, and some otherwise good people were able to turn their heads and not see what was going on around them. I spent enough time in Germany to have gotten to know a few of them myself. There were even some who denied their own bloodlines to escape the persecution, but didn't even speak out against it.
I can tell you this from experience: there's no amount of philosophizing and training that prepares you for being shot at. There are some circumstances that you just don't know what you will do until you are there.
2007-04-09 08:26:48 · answer #2 · answered by open4one 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The law (The Constitution) also states that all men are created equal and should have certain inalienable rights such as life, LIBERTY, and the persuit of happiness.
So technically, having someone as a slave WAS breaking the law, since slaves were being denied their liberty. The slave owners were the ones who broke the laws. The "fugitive slaves" were only exercising their right to liberty. A right they all should've had under the Constitution.
2007-04-09 08:22:17 · answer #3 · answered by mmatthews000 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its hard to say. Now, of course, we know slavery is a violation of simple human rights and decency. So now, living in this day, I would emphatically say, No, I would not. But when people are raised in certain settings and are raised to believe that certain culture norms are just "the way it is," it is hard to say if I would have during slavery.
As for "evil" laws, I believe we answer to a higher innate morality than the "law-makers." I believe we are to abide by the laws as long as it does not go against our innate morality of right and wrong.
2007-04-09 08:24:53 · answer #4 · answered by asparks05 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Depends. I don't think it's very wise to ask a question out of it's contemporary perspective. It changes the whole environment of the topic, and thus renders it null and void. Sure. We would all like to be the unsung heroes of the Underground Railroad, but, who is to say we would have believed the same as we do now, had we been raised in that time period? It's not an accurate scenario.
2007-04-09 08:23:35 · answer #5 · answered by sjsosullivan 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I totally disagree because "people" make the laws, and people obviously make mistakes, and that is evident in the enslavement of people. I would have definitely kept fugitive slaves a secret if I would have lived back then. I'm glad you posted this question. I'd like to see others' responses to this. I know there are going to be some idiotic submissions saying they would have turned in fugitive "SLAVES."
2007-04-09 08:24:57 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't think I would turn myself in,sorry. BTW: The South is not to blame for slavery,they came here to Rhode Island first and were distributed throughout the country.One of the most popular Ivy League Colleges (Brown University) was built on the backs of slaves.So people here up North could have done something also.
2007-04-09 08:17:49 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Of course we must obey the law and be upstanding citizens but at the same time we do have our conscience and we must stand up to what we believe is right and unjust.. Slaves enduring harsh working conditions and inhumane treatment was clearly inmoral; Owning people as slaves was not only cruel but it was a social injustice..
2007-04-09 08:22:46 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Old news. Neither the Democratic nor Republican party of today looks at all like their counterparts in 1850. (In 1850, the Republican party didn't even exist.) Ideological shifts occurred in the 1910s, 1930s, 1960s, 1970s.
2016-04-01 05:35:15 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't believe that's the law anymore. At least, it's not here.
The law is the law, but when it conflicts with my morals, I go with morals. Do you think that makes me a good person, even without knowing what my morals are?
2007-04-09 08:21:28 · answer #10 · answered by Whizbang 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nope.
I would have been a "John Brown" abolitionist and would have provided a stop on the "Underground Railroad".
Sometimes a little civil disobedience can be a good thing.
2007-04-09 08:20:11 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋