Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Do you believe that even morally wrong laws should be enforced and followed? A lot of the segregation and jim crow laws were pretty odious. Women weren't allowed to have bank accounts and credit cards in multiple countries (even the US until 1974). Women were not allowed to legally vote (one Swiss canton kept this until 1990!).

Do you believe that these laws should be enforced and followed despite most people believing that they are morally wrong?



There's a coherent argument for doing so: if the law is enforced, and no one wants it to be enforced, it creates pressure to fix the law. Laws that are on the books but not enforced lead to laws meaning nothing in the extreme case.

I think there's merit to both sides and the sweet spot is somewhere in the middle.


Who decides what is morally wrong? If everyone decided to not follow or enforce laws based on their own morals, society would be in absolute chaos. You can't have a functioning society around "I do what I believe, fuck y'all"


People ultimately decide on their own. There are institutions that make judgments but ultimate it's an individual that decides. But for a lot of things, there are nearly universal agreement going one way, e.g. everyone almost universally agrees that murder is wrong.


In the US we call it the Supreme Court




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: