By all means do. Law should be questioned and examined. And if they do actually have sound reasoning behind them, then it's just good luck that they were instituted because of moral outrage. Oh of course. I get that. My point was that laws exist due to moral outcry so why say it is there to curb it? The only reason why we dont chop someone's hands off for stealing is because as shown by this thread - popular majority finds it "barbaric".But moral outcry can be hugely harmful; it has a tendency to lead to retribution for the sake of retribution, whereas taking a balanced view on things leads to retribution for the sake of deterrence and rehabilitation, which is preferable.[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Sajedene"] Well, once we start saying that laws should not be there to curb public moral outcry - then I start questioning the validity of laws that exist due to public moral outcry.Sajedene
Log in to comment