I did just that and nothing you have said provides evidence to the contrary.
Um, yeah. I know you did. So? My statement pertains to why I disagree with that.
No. The legal system does not concern itself with whether abortion is moral or immoral, whether Robert Latimer was moral or immoral. Certainly laws codify the principles but law making is the job of the politician
It can't be compartmentalized that way. Challenges within the court system decide on the merit of the laws and the laws themselves are a direct reflection of societies values and principles, so in deciding on the merit of the law the system does concern itself with the values those laws were written to uphold.
Politics plays a role, precedents play a role, the courts play a role, the judiciary plays a role, the laws as written play a role. Big picture, it's all interwoven. It still all reflects societies values.
Um, yeah. I know. Your statement has no basis in reality.
The legal system applies itself to the laws written by politicians on the basis of morality.
Sort of right. The legal system applies itself to the laws written by politicians on the basis of morality.
Try and argue morality and the legal system without bringing "politician" and "lawmakers" into it. Betcha ya can't.
It can't be compartmentalized that way. Challenges within the court system decide on the merit of the laws and the laws themselves are a direct reflection of societies values and principles, so in deciding on the merit of the law the system does concern itself with the values those laws were written to uphold.
Politics plays a role, precedents play a role, the courts play a role, the judiciary plays a role, the laws as written play a role. Big picture, it's all interwoven. It still all reflects societies values.
And further, existing legislation also serves as a guideline for the drafting of future legislation. The most important ones of course being the charter and constitution. That would be the reason that some laws do not hold up to the ultimate scrutiny in a court of law. In the end, if they run contrary to the established principals, values and morals of society as established in the basic framework, then they are history. And that's a good thing because relying on politicians to set the moral pace of the nation is a frightening prospect.
Try and argue morality and the legal system without bringing "politician" and "lawmakers" into it. Betcha ya can't.
Who gives a crap about your betting? I don't.
I know you are but what am I?
There ya have it folks...... cannuck at his finest.
Oops, looks like the discussion just got lowered to junior high school level. What's next, I know you are but what am I?
Oops, looks like the discussion just got lowered to junior high school level. What's next, I know you are but what am I?
Projecting your frame of "mind" onto me? tsk tsk
Projecting your frame of "mind" onto me? tsk tsk
I don't have to project anything on to you. I'll let your posts speak for themselves.
Projecting your frame of "mind" onto me? tsk tsk
And I'll bet absolutely no one, sees them in the same light as you. But instead, will actually agree with LG's assertion.
And I'll bet absolutely no one, sees them in the same light as you. But instead, will actually agree with LG's assertion.
That's a bet I would take in a heart beat if I had any faith you would pay up.
That's what I said here:... You said the statement had no basis in reality.