Law and Morality (Essay Sample)

Laws and Morality
Insert your name
Course
Professor’s name
Date due
Laws and Morality
Introduction
The relation between law and morality has been a debatable issue for a long time. Both the law and morality are used to set standards, which are critical in managing or governing the behavior of people in the society. Law and moral rules are used in the United Kingdom (UK) to define what is wrong from right. Both of them tend to manage the duties, obligations, and responsibilities. In order to understand the relationship between law and morality, it is essential to know the meaning of law and morality. The law is defined as the body of rules and regulations that is recognized and applied by the state in the administration of justice. On the other hand, morality refers to the set of beliefs, principles, values, and standard behavior. Morality is not enforced by the government or the constitution but through the influence of other individuals, religion, and conscience. This paper will examine the relation between the law and morals in the United Kingdom.DiscussionEach society exists because of some purpose. Societies are required by the dignities and needs of an individual. According to Wacks (2012), laws are critical to the society because they are necessary means to achieve the objective of the state, and the goal in which all the laws that govern the society is to achieve the common good. In this concept, most societies, the goal of the legal rule is to provide an opportunity for a person to be able to live a full life. The most goal of the state in implementing the laws is to have peace in the society. Morality, on the other hand, is related with the order in the society. The morality of anything primarily rests in its perfection and its act. Therefore, law and morality cannot be separated because of their moral obligation imposed. For instance, the moral obligation of the society is to avoid the discrimination of other people with weak characteristics such as racism, disabilities, gender inequality, ethnic, and nationalism (Dyzenhaus & Ripstein, 2001).In UK, laws are created and established by the formal institution such as the parliament. The difference between morals and legal rules is that while the laws are enforced by the state, morals evolve as a feeling within the society. Despite the difference, it is hard to separate the two because morals influence individuals within the society to determine what is wrong from right (Petrażycki, 2011). Both of them tend to influence each other. For instance, a law, which prohibits murder, is related to the moral concept that it is wrong to kill. These two will influence each other so that the society behaves in both moral concepts and legal rules of the state. The legal laws must govern the society, but it will be effective to use the moral concept to enforce the laws. The state courts follow the rule of laws rather than using moral principles to manage legal issues. Peach (2002) argues that despite the State courts using legal laws to run its business, there are parts of the justice system that use moral concepts to provide a verdict. For instance, a case involving the jury is likely to involve moral principles. This means that it is hard to separate morals and laws.The relationship between laws and morality is not always in the open. For instance, there are some laws that have no moral relationship, but are regulatory in function, such as the prohibition of particular drugs and traffic offenses (Lee 1986). In the case of the prohibition of drugs, some people may argue that public health is a moral matter that the law has to be concerned. On the other hand, some moral concepts are not related to legal rules. For instance, the moral issue that it is a virtue to look for each one in the society is not a legal obligation. The UK laws do not state that it is the society obligation to look after one another. According to the law, it is not a responsibility of an individual to take care of someone unless the individual has the responsibility to act (Haakonssen, 1996). An example is a case where a parent neglects to feed his or her child. This will lead to the conviction of the parent. This is an omission and not an act.In the UK court of law, the law must be separate from moral principles because of lack of agreement. This is because if the morality is used to influence the law, it may cause more harm than good. For example, the moral issue of homosexuality (Postema et al.2011). The UK justice department will find it hard to make this issue criminal despite the moral perspective. A law may either exist or not. The existence of the laws must be established. Morals, on the other hand, are natural in existence. The society is divided on the homosexuality, and it is better for the legal rules to be separated from morality at some point. The society’s attitude towards the law is irrelevant. A law must exist even if some individual does not follow it. In UK, there are arguments concerning the legalizing of euthanasia. Most people in the society believe that euthanasia is against the will of God (Mather, 1999). Making the use of euthanasia illegal will cause more problems in the society.Judicial change may influence shifts in morality. For instance, the ability of the courts to change their perception on the matrimonial rape caused the House of the Lords to change their decisions that when an individual gets married, they need an approval to have sex (Dworkin, 1999). The issue of homosexuality has also evolved in UK since the Sexual Offences Act of 1967, to the present Marriage Act of 2013. This current Act allows marriage between homosexuals. The law also can influence the morality concepts. The issue of gender equality has been influenced by the legal rule in the society. For instance, the main objective of Equality Act of 2010 is to bring equal opportunities to people with disadvantaged characteristics such disability and gender. Many people in the society believe that there are many changes in the in terms of acceptance of these characteristics, since the law was passed (Mather, 1999).There are conflicting views on whether the law to uphold the moral principles. Some people believe that the law is just, while other people argue that the law is a method of control. According to Mather (1999), in order to explain this, it is critical to understand the Hart-Fuller debate and Hart-Devlin debate. The Hart-Fuller debate focused on a case involving a Nazi woman who sends her husband to the Eastern Front. She used the immoral concept to deprive her husband his freedom. In this case, the law did not relate to the moral concepts. Hart argued that the law is absolute, and the society should follow the law regardless of its moral principles. Fuller argues that laws that are immoral should not be followed but disobeyed (Petrażycki, 2011).In the Hart-Devlin, is focused with the legalization of homosexual activities in the society. On Hart perspective, he argued that the law should not govern an individual’s private life because it does not concern the public interest (Petrażycki, 2011). Devlin argued that it was important to uphold morality, even within an individual private life. He furthered his argument by stating if the state fails to uphold the morality in an individual life will lead to the disintegration of the society. Hart is a Positivist, meaning that he believes that the law is absolute, and should not be persuaded to follow the common opinion of the society. On the other hand, Fuller and Devlin should be referred as Natural Lawyers. Devlin and Fuller believe that the legal rule naturally develops with the society. In some cases, the Positivists believe that the law is an instrument that intends to control the society for greater good (Mather, 1999).In the UK, an example of positivism within the legal rule would comprise a case of Gallick. In this case, it was held that even though the moral objection to the under-age females having sexual encounters, it is critical to allow them to consent to take pills, making sure that she is aware of the circumstances, in order to prevent the harm that may befall her. Another case relating to positivists is the case of the Forced Marriages Acts of 2007 (Mather, 1999). In this case, it was agreed that forced marriages are illegal, despite it conflict the moral views of some cultures. Hence, there has been a case stating that about 80% of the UK population is favoring certain types of assisted suicide, despite it not included in the law. This will result in more people pressurized to end their lives. The law prohibiting this will protect the society from itself (Dworkin, 1999).Libertarianism believes that the Law should preserve safety, but it should not be involved with moral issues. According to libertarianism, if the act does not negatively affect an individual or the society, then it is not the responsibility of the Law to intervene. For example, the issue of homosexuality in the Sexual Act of 1967 should be allowed in the society (Dyzenhaus & Ripstein, 2001). If Positivist were allowed to present his argument, he would argue that the Law should be capable to prevent harm to the self because it is the responsibility of the Law to prevent harm. This theory of libertarianism may cause confusion at some point. In a case where a doctor suggests that one of the conjoined twins should be killed in order to save the other can cause confusion. In this case, this is referred as the defense of necessity, and it involves an individual choosing the lesser of two evils (Petrażycki, 2011). The harm principle, on the other hand, states that the weaker twin does not have the right to end the life of the other. The goal, in this case, is to come up with minimum harm.The Modern Natural Law is based on the concept that the law is naturally revealed in ...