Skip to main content

Do we need ethics if we have laws? Why or why not?

Ethics are essential because laws arise out of ethical choices. According to Vincent Ruggiero, in his book Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues (2011), ethics can be defined as the "study of right and wrong" (as cited by Polytechnic School). Laws develop when one person or a group of persons decide that some action, such as sexual harassment, is wrong. However, as Ruggiero asserts, just because laws arise from ethics does not necessarily mean that "every law is morally right." Laws change over time as our senses of right and wrong change; therefore, ethics must always be a constant guiding force to determining laws.

One example of a law changing over time as our sense of ethics has changed concerns the practice of homosexuality. Multiple countries have had sodomy laws, which make the practice of homosexuality illegal. In England, sodomy was historically called buggery and first decreed a felony with the Buggery Act of 1533, making buggery a crime punishable by death ("Gay Rights Movement," Encyclopaedia Britannica). After James Pratt and John Smith were executed in 1835, Parliament enacted the Labouchere Amendment to make buggery a crime punishable by two years of jail time ("Pratt & Smith--Last UK Men Hanged for Sodomy," Peter Tatchell Foundation Speaking out for Human Rights). After a substantial increase in arrests of homosexual men after World War II, the government issued an investigation into homosexuality published in the Wolfenden Report in 1957 ("Wolfenden Report," Encyclopaedia Britannica). Committee members overseeing the report determined that homosexuality should no longer be considered a crime.

Many examples of laws changing over time, such as women's suffrage laws and civil laws, further show that laws will always need to be guided by our sense of right and wrong. As our views of right and wrong change, our laws change too.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more

What warning does Chuchundra issue to Rikki?

Chuchundra, the sniveling, fearful muskrat who creeps around walls because he is too terrified to go into the center of a room, meets Rikki in the middle of the night. He insults Rikki by begging him not to kill him. He then insults him by suggesting that Nag might mistake Chuchundra for Rikki. He says, "Those who kill snakes get killed by snakes."  He issues this warning to Rikki not to help keep Rikki safe but as a way of explaining why Rikki's presence gives him, Chuchundra, more reason to fear.  Chuchundra starts to tell Rikki what Chua the rat told him--but breaks it off when he realizes he might be overheard by Nag. He says, "Nag is everywhere, Rikki-Tikki." Rikki threatens to bite Chuchundra to get him to talk. Even then, Chuchundra won't overtly reveal any information. But he does say, "Can't you hear, Rikki-Tikki?" This is enough of a clue for the clever mongoose. He listens carefully and can just make out the "faintest scratch-s...
Post a Comment
Read more