LAW AWAY FROM MORALITY

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Teves, Hillary Grace O. LLB-1B
Final Article in Legal Philosophy
Palawan State University- School of Law
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atty. Julius M. Conception
Professorial Lecturer
November 14, 2017

Application of the law is interpreted to what the framers intended it to

be. If your country provided for a law that requires you to pay poll tax and
you are unable to do it then you are subject to punishment as it provides in
case of disobedience. But how about a judge making a final decision
reducing the penalty, for example of a person who is not able to pay poll tax
because his child died because of the fact that the person’s insurance was put
off leaving him no money for the hospital expenses and worse his expenses
for living, who then confessed it to the judge, and the latter is so concerned
considering circumstances that if he punish the person to pay for fine that in
fact would cost him nothing afterwards, is the judge not applying what is
intended to be the application of the law? The example illustrates if there is a
relation between law and morality. The advent that a law can be passed not
considering if the effect will be good to others; and if a law is created
without moral intervention does it prohibit the judge applying his moral
values to ensure that the law is properly applied?

According to Michael Bauman, all laws, whether prescriptive or

prohibitive legislate morality. All laws, regardless of their content or their
intent, arise from a system of values, from a belief that some things are right
and others wrong, that some things are good and others bad, that some things
are better and others worse. In the formulation and enforcement of law, the
question is never whether or not morality will be legislated, but which one.
 As patented in legal moralism, the society’s collective moral
judgement is a necessary factor to legislate laws; if it is conflict with it
therefore it would not be passed, otherwise if it is agreed upon. As to what
Patrick Devlin called “Shared Morality”, speaks that the law can be used to
preserve the shared morality as a means of preserving society itself. But
again, whose morality? That question is fundamentally important because
not all systems of morality are equal. Some are wise, others foolish. How do
we know? Or find a way to do something about it?

The collective morality here in the Philippines would be the

Catholicism that the Filipinos practiced from the longest time since Spain’s
colonization, and in fact our government is based on both Spain and
American because of their inhabitancy in the past. But that does not mean
we do not have conflict regarding legislating law. The government bestowed
autonomy to some provinces in Mindanao, having the most populated
Filipino Muslim Groups, also giving our fellow citizen autonomy to have
their own laws that are applicable to their shared beliefs. But that does not
mean that they are free from our statutes; for example, the practice of
beheading those who are unbelievers of Allah is in their belief moral, but in
the majority civil point of view is immoral, and makes them liable for the
crime and should be inflicted proper punishment as our penal laws required.

“Law limits human autonomy by restricting freedom”. Do humans

really have their autonomy, as to themselves or others? I believe no, we
don’t have such autonomy. As a new born child lived under the roof of his
parents, breastfed, bottle-fed, until able to crawl, stand and walk, and is
being restricted to touch the electric socket, bite toys, or anything that may
come on hand, a growing child resisting to eat vegetables because all he
wants is chips, chocolates, soft drinks, and all the junks fruits out there, and
is therefore being spanked by his father or mother knowing that is not good
for the child, a grown up child that is enrolled to primary school that is
crying because he just want to stay at home and play, but he needs to study,
a young man that is addicted to computer games staying all day all night,
and was absent in school, but was caught by his dad and was grounded, and
a college student that don’t want to finish studies because he feels that he is
capable of being independent and need not to graduate ended with no job
and no support, because he did not follow what his parents told him to do.
These are minimal example that we don’t have autonomy in ourselves
because we have, even though we don’t want to someone who would rule
over us telling us what to do or not to do. Our moral beliefs would be
determined by who do we recognize as sovereign to us, that there is a greater
being that needs to be worshipped and glorified, that we are accountable to
Him at the end of our temporary life here on earth and live with Him in
eternity to the next, as what do Christians believe in.

Do laws really restrict freedom of individuals? I would say yes, as

Bauman writes, Law teaches the citizens what is right and good, and it
punishes those who cannot or will not learn that lesson. He also illustrated,
“To make the point from a different angle, when we pass laws that require
drivers to drive their vehicles at 20 mph or less in school zones, we do so
because we have a value system that rightly puts greater worth in human life
than in vehicular speed. That valuation is a moral judgment. That moral
valuation we properly and wisely seek to translate into binding and
enforceable law. We propose and pass such laws because we think it wrong
for drivers recklessly to endanger the lives of defenseless children, who lack
the experience, foresight, and physical dexterity to keep themselves out of
harm’s way on the streets. We punish drivers who do not do as the law
requires. No one, in the face of such proposed legislation, says to the local
authorities that those authorities have no right to impose their morality on
others, even though that is precisely what such laws do. Much less does
anyone seriously argue that to propose such values-laden laws is an effort to
tear down the wall of separation between church and state” This clearly
concludes my earlier conviction that humans do not have autonomy.

“A value system that rightly puts greater worth in human life” a

phrase earlier stated that means a lot. It portrays that laws are created to
preserve human life, or to live in an orderly and peaceful society helping
every person to develop themselves, this is a moral judgement to be
preserved. But then again how about the authority that governing the state is
to some extent make a rule that would depend only to what they know
beneficial to them, creating one world government, and makes the people
with different ties, culture, and practices not a matter in consideration in
creating laws, would this be beneficial to the society at large? How large
should a State be? As to the book “History of Western Philosophy by
Bertrand Russell” said that “Large cities, we are told, are never well
governed, because a great multitude cannot be orderly. A State ought to be
large enough to be more or less self-sufficing, but not too large for
constitutional government. It ought to be small enough for the citizens to
know each other’s characters; otherwise right will not be done in elections or
lawsuits.” Governing the whole world would seem an impossible human
creation because as being said to manage a great multitude cannot be
orderly, holding and distributing resources would lead to scarcity, providing
for the needs of every person would make a hard time as they differ towards
each perception of wants and needs, and the truth that you cannot impose
your own belief to another.

Government is ordained by God, he designed and empowers to protect

and preserve society at large. We cannot remove the reality that there is a
greater sovereign that is ruling upon as, making us united, and keeping the
peace in order by his grace. Governing authorities are sent by him to be the
instrument to govern the society to punish those who do evil and to praise
those who do good. Martin Luther had something to say on this subject. In
Gustaf Wingren’s book, Luther on Vocation, we read: “A good government,
which fulfils its duty of office, rules the people in opposition to a contrary
power which would control. The authority of the government is not derived
from the fact that it gives expression to a people’s genius, but from the fact
that God has ordained it to thwart the devil. Government is of God, created
by him.” Clearly He is our morality

According to William Blackstone, law, in its most general and

comprehensive sense, signifies a rule of action; and is applied
indiscriminately to all kinds of action, whether animate or inanimate,
rational or irrational. Thus we say, the laws of motion, of gravitation, of
optics, or mechanics, as well as the laws of nature and of nations. And it is
that rule of action, which is prescribed by some superior, and which the
inferior is bound to obey. Is there really a moral obligation to obey the law?
To naturalists law is generally a morally good thing and laws are generally
just. If law is generally good for people then it makes more sense to say that
we are morally bound to obey the law because we are upholding something
which is generally useful and just. It is better to assume that there is an
obligation to obey the law so that more laws are followed. Some people have
strong conviction to obey the laws and noncompliance would anguish their
conscience saying “I just don’t, it’s illegal” they opt to follow it
wholeheartedly, they are aware of the consequences that may happen even
though they don’t know what, and how it will be. What people are really
saying when they say “you can't legislate morality” is that they do not want
God and God's laws over them. Any law that is based on anything other than
what God has said, seems to be acceptable to them. But if the law is
presented as coming from the Bible, they put their fingers in their ears and
scream: “you can't legislate morality!” When people claim that we cannot
legislate morality, what they are really saying is that they don't want God's
law to be applied to them. But it is the responsibility of all Governments to
enact laws that enforce God's Law. The government is ordained by God, and
so the law is, so as the innate moral obligation to obey it.

This would lead us to a conclusion that you cannot separate law form
morality. Even though how geniuses we are to think about the system of
separating it, morality finds a way of returning. Just like the inventor taking
credit for the machine he had done, a scientist that created the law of inertia
that even though already dead is known for it, he is Isaac Newton. Being
happy with the company of someone without realising that is it love, is like
looking for something that’s already there. It is insisting that God is not real
and still feeling or recognizing His presence to the nature, the wind and the
light and receiving good attitude from everyman who believes in Him.
Separating law from morality is similar to separating every human being
from their creator, thus Colossians 1:16 says: For by him were all things
created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible,
whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all
things were created by him, and for him. (KJV)
Works Cited:
Law and Morality – Michael Bauman http://www.equip.org/article/law-and-
morality/

Philosophy of Law: Normative Jurisprudence - Kenneth Einar Himma

http://www.iep.utm.edu/law-phil/

History of Western Philosophy - Bertrand Russell p. 192

Seeing God’s Presence in Government Work - Russell Gehrlein
https://tifwe.org/gods-presence-in-government-work/

“I just don’t, it’s illegal” – Is There a Moral Obligation to Obey the Law? –
Samantha Love https://www.oxford-royale.co.uk/articles/moral-obligation-
obey-law.html

Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765-1769) - Sir William

Blackstone - https://lonang.com/library/reference/blackstone-commentaries-
law-england/bla-002/

Does God's Law Apply to All Men, in All Nations, Through All Time? -
James R Hughes
http://www.epctoronto.org/Press/Publications_JRHughes/God%27s_Law_A
pplies_to_all_men_through_all_time.htm#_ftn1