Bush's visit to Britain

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by MikeH
Isn't breaking the law immoral?

I'm not able to figure out if this is addressed to me or diplomat.

[Q Classic]

something about immoral laws and moral behavior or some such.

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by MikeH
Diplomat, you'd better get busy, there are a lot more countries you need to invade to stop that kind of thing.

If you can stop it through peaceful means, then you should do that first. War is always a last resort.

In the case of Iraq, we tried 12 years of econ sanctions and no-fly zones which failed to change the humanitarian crisis or to deal with the national security threat. So, war was neccessary at that point.

The US claimed to have a humanitarian and a national security reason to go to war in Bosnia, which we did without formal UN approval. Why not in Iraq?

[MikeH]

What about all the other countries? Why save the Iraqis and not all the others?

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by MikeH
Isn't breaking the law immoral?

Was it immoral for blacks to resist segregation? I would say yes.

My point is that if the law is immoral to being with, then breaking it is ok IMO.

Obviously, determining whether or not the law is immoral can be a thorny issue, so I'll help you out.

Diplomat's moral principle #1:
"Any law that causes pain either physical or emotional on a human being, is immoral"

[HershOstropoler]

Originally posted by The diplomat

"Any law that causes pain either physical or emotional on a human being, is immoral"

Say good bye to penal law.

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by MikeH
What about all the other countries? Why save the Iraqis and not all the others?

Did you read my above post? I believe we should do everything we can to save innocent people from oppression no matter which country they are from, but we should use peaceful means first, and only use force if it is neccessary.

[MikeH]

Diplomat's moral principle #1:
"Any law that causes pain either physical or emotional on a human being, is immoral"

Fair enough. So any law that allows the government to put people in prison is immoral.

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by MikeH
Fair enough. So any law that allows the government to put people in prison is immoral.

It would depend on what the prison is like. Simply isolationg people from society (because they are dangerous to society), is not neccessarily immoral.

For example, I could isolate you completely from the rest of society by locking you up in a plush 4 star hotel on a desert island. That would not be immoral since it does not cause you any pain.

But obviously, a lot of the stuff that goes in prisons, is definitely immoral!

[MikeH]

Isolating people from society (esp. their friends and loved ones) causes emotional pain so it's out under your laws I'm afraid.

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by MikeH
Isolating people from society (esp. their friends and loved ones) causes emotional pain so it's out under your laws I'm afraid.

should I rephrase my principle?

"Any law that causes pain either physical or emotional, without proper justification, is immoral."

[Q Classic]

actually, isolation can cause lots of pain.

most depressives socially and physically isolate themselves, which only exacerbates the situation they're in.

[Q Classic]

what constitutes proper justification? laws?

[MikeH]

Originally posted by The diplomat


should I rephrase my principle?

"Any law that causes pain either physical or emotional, without proper justification, is immoral."

Good so now all I need to do is justify what I'm doing and I can cause as much emotional and physical pain as I want.

[MikeH]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
what constitutes proper justification? laws?

Great idea! To stop people abusing the system and just justifying anything we'll write down the rules about when you are allowed to cause physical and emotional suffering and call them 'laws'. Then if anyone breaks these laws we can punish them.

Now we've got a nice moral system.