Law and Morality: Examining Their Conflicting and Complementary Roles

This essay examines the complex relationship between law and morality, arguing that they cannot be mixed due to their inherent differences. It explores the concepts of law as a system of rules enforced by penalties, and morality as societal standards of right and wrong. The essay discusses the theor...Read More

Law And Morality Cannot Mix

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
TASK...............................................................................................................................................1
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................4
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................5

INTRODUCTION
Law is a system with rules which are recognised and practises by a particular nation or
community as regulating actions for its citizens with enforcement of penalties. The rules define
the correct procedures to be followed to avoid the prosecutions, fines and punishments.
Conversely, morals are the standards of the behaviours and principles defining what is right or
wrong which are sectioned by the society enabling the people to live in groups and communities
with cooperation. The present essay present the views and discussion regarding to laws and
morality and the fact that they cannot be mixed as while considering the morals laws cannot be
sabotage.
TASK
Topic: “Law and morals cannot be mixed. Law is the law and to consider morals works, it
cannot undermine the law as we know it”
In this essay discussion is presented related with relation between law and morality and
the priority given to the laws as both the termed can not be mixed. The theories related with
natural laws and legal positivism is discussed along with how these influence each other along
with morals and legal duty of the society to obey the law (Government enforcement of morality,
2018). The facts determines that law have an underhand over morals principle and values
defining absolute power of the laws and legislation.
Number of issues are there regarding the relationship between laws and morality in a democracy
like UK. Among all the problem main question that is still standing is that whether legislation
should reflects moral principles, whether judges should interpreter the laws in light of moral
values and whether laws should enforce morality and what gives the law its authority.
The behaviours which are commonly regarded as immoral do not often considered to be
illegal. Both legal and morals values are distinguished from each other such a parking on a
double yellow line is legally incorrect but it is not considered as morally wrong.
In the present times morals and laws and morals are universally held to be unrelated. The
legal ethics refers to the professional honesty of lawyer and judges (Svensson, 2015). Law and
Morality do not coincide in meaning, though there should be necessary interdependence between
them. Moral law distinguishes right and wrong in (free) human actions. It is aimed above all at
personal improvement and ultimately at salvation. The laws are under the legal framework of a
1

nation have aim to make it possible for the people to live together in the society with peace and
justice.
The laws are set or rules and boundaries which are established by the authorities which
must be obeyed and failure to the same can result in sections. Conversely, the moral values,
beliefs and principles are sets framed by the society determining what is right and what is wrong
(Morality and Law, 2018). However, the fact presents that both laws and morals are different as
laws are the code of conduct which society must obey madatorily, on the other hand morals are
not backed up by legal sanctions but are reinforced by the pressure of the society such as family
and friends. These have great level of influence over people and being developed over 1000
years. While the laws are introduces with the act of parliaments and can be changed with
immediate effect as well.
The laws are often seen to be reinforced and upheld the moral values but with no
consistency there is a major problem regarding the moral code and its legal application. This
fact can be authenticated with example of the case of RvR in 1991 changing the law as rape
within the marriage was determined as a crime. The moral perception of treating wife as property
of the husband was annulled which was a practice from ancient times.
The theory of natural law was adopted by Thomas Aquinas stating that that is a higher
law which must be confirmed by legal system (McLean and Wolfe, 2016). The higher law was
related with the human rights and in doing so natural code must be followed unless leading to
social unrest.
Another theory of utilitarianism {liberal view} was defined by John Stuart Mill, who
proposed that moral actions produces good act for many in the society. The extension of this
theory was debated by Edwin Schur in crime without victims. It was argued that acts of abortion,
drug abuse do not harm the innocents rather those who wants it on their own free will. He stated
that laws must be not be used to upheld the morality rather to prevent the harm to citizens.
Furthermore, H.L.A Hart who was influence by the theories of mill stated that legal
enforcement of moral code is not required as it intervene the liberty of individuals (Morals,
2018). He gave a theory of paternalistic view and often considered as theory of legal positivism.
The facts were presented by Hart as law should intervene a privet life to prevent the harm to
others and to oneself.
2

Conversely, Lord Devlin was against it and stated the society had certain standard related
with moral obligations which must be supported by law as a duty. He gave a theory named as
moralist view. In case of R V Brown [1994] the judges imposed their values and based the
conviction on the public policy for imposition of the criminal sanction. On the other hand in case
of R V Wilson the judges do not consider the moral Principe as passed judgement based purely
on laws. This shows that judges allowed their moral values affect their judgements.
But the facts can not be denied that certain moral vales are legally correct and both of
them go in hand in specific matters. Such fact was establishes in the case of Diane Pretty, 2001
where Diane filed a petition for euthanasia which is both moray and legally wrong, the request
was refused by the court (Gaus and Nichols, 2017). But in the case of Miss B in 2002, court held
that a person have a legal right to refuse the continuation of thee treatment which amount to
passive euthanasia which is legal but morally incorrect.
The above discussion gives a view that with time the have been a development regarding
the implication of moral principles in legal framework and deciding the cases overtime. With the
development of different theories the moral vales were considered in natural view but in the legal
positivism theory by hart it, facts was alto declines as law is law and moral values do not have
any relation with legal concept (Sunstein and Vemuele, 2016). The legal positivism objective
requires that law is defined and the morals are neutral. The positivism states that law is enacted
by legal procedures and until it is change it remains a law to be obeyed by everyone. However,
the natural thinker are of the view that law is morally loaded and there is an obligation to obey
by the law.
With the legal positivism one distinctly associated doctrine associated is the separation
of the law and morality. The main principle of this theory is that while giving a jurisprudential
the essential properties law does not include moral bearings (Morgenthau, 2017). This theory
was given by the H.L.A Hart in the article Positivism and Sep ration of the law. He was of the
view that positivism is a theory related with natural law rather than theory on how lawyer and
judges should reason and decide. There is an involvement of the connection that there is no
necessary relation between law and morality. The while interpreting certain cases such as
euthanasia can consider the moral values but there is no such obligation on the law to always
take into account the moral principles and values prevailing in the society while passing a
jurisdiction.
3

The idea is clear that their no necessary connection between law and morality. The law is
legal obligation for all, be it lawyers, judges or the citizens, on the other hand morals are not
backed up be any legal authority. The things or act which are illegal or wrong in law as well as
moral values and principles, consider the moral obligations. For the cases where the law states
one thing and moral principles other, the legal statues always prevails. The judgements are
always passed in accordance with legal requirements, hence there is on necessary connection
between law and morality.
CONCLUSION
To conclude the essay it can be stated that laws and morals do not coincide in meaning
and both have independence between them. The laws and legislation defines the orders and
conduct of the citizens and other in the nations as legal framework while morals have been
defined by the society as to what is right and wrong. Further it has been interpreted in the laws
have their own implication and mandatory to be followed conversely morals have been
determined by the humans and society in general practices. In practising the laws the morals do
not overpower the legal structure.
4

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Gaus, G. and Nichols, S., 2017. Moral learning in the open society: the theory and practice of
natural liberty. Social Philosophy and Policy. 34(1). pp.79-101.
McLean, K. and Wolfe, S. E., 2016. A sense of injustice loosens the moral bind of law:
Specifying the links between procedural injustice, neutralizations, and
offending. Criminal Justice and Behavior. 43(1). pp.27-44.
Morgenthau, H. J., 2017. Positivism, functionalism, and international law. In The Nature of
International Law.(pp. 159-184). Routledge.
Sunstein, C. R. and Vemuele, A., 2017. The Morality of Administrative Law. Harv. L. Rev.131.
p.1924.
Svensson, R., 2015. An examination of the interaction between morality and deterrence in
offending: A research note. Crime & Delinquency. 61(1). pp.3-18.
Online
Morality and Law. 2018. [Online] Available Through:
<http://www.garlikov.com/philosophy/moralityandlaw.htm>
Morals. 2018. [Online] Available Through:
<https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/glossary/morals>
Government enforcement of morality. 2018. [Online] Available Through:
<https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/
&httpsredir=1&article=2910&context=dissertations_1>
5