Legality vs. Right (was RE: [PLUG-TALK] Re: [PLUG] Sounds good to me ;))

Miller, Jeremy JMILLER at ci.albany.or.us
Tue Jun 18 23:31:26 UTC 2002


> > I stand by the statement and belief that legality has no 
> bearing on right
> > or wrong.
> >
> 
> You misdirect because that is not in question here

Well... why not?  

If not, I'm taking the opportunity to put it in question, because I see some
relevency to the current argument.  (The one concerning illegal aliens.)
Hence the new subject line.


Jeme says that legality has no bearing on right or wrong.


I will state that I agree, but only with a condition.  To furthur clarify, I
think legality is our best attempt to codify what is considered right, and
what is considered wrong.  (Via a process of government that is supposed to,
via representation of the people doing the considering, try to determine
what those things are.  Whether or not they do a good job of that is a
different argument. :)  

So it does have bearing... but in reverse.  Legality /= Right, because Right
is not a constant.  (Quite the opposite... it is often in dispute, and
throughout history a moving target.)  However, one could say the job of the
government is to try to ensure that Legality is as close as it possibly can
be to Right.  (Again, I'm not commenting on whether they're accomplishing it
or not.)

The government is supposed to represent the people, so if the people (voting
citizens) collectively determine that some portion of legality is not close
enough to what they consider Right, then the government needs to correct it.
Right?  The same way they should correct the economic policy referred to
earlier, if the people collectively decide it really is a bad idea and needs
to be fixed back to the way it was.

Consider this:

Jeme likes the pre 20th century immigration policy, and thinks we should
return to it. (Whether anyone agrees or not.)
You like the pre 20th century fiscal policy, and think we should return to
it. (Whether anyone agreess or not.)

You both disagree with some form of what is currently considered Legal, and
think it isn't Right, and needs to be changed.

Based on that observation, I'd say that stating a belief that current
legality and "the right thing" may not be the same thing is very relevant to
this discussion, and as such, not a misdirection.

It is the first step to enacting change... to state that they may not be
equal enough and need to be changed.





More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list