5 ms·

You cannot replace ethical with legal. We all understand its legal. But to post on a forum criticizing this is not a permissible action?, but some how supposed

You cannot replace ethical with legal. We all understand its legal. But to post on a forum criticizing this is not a permissible action?, but some how supposed to bring the political class to change things...

solarkraft 8y ago
The legal system should work to make ethical things legal and unethical things illegal. This is legal. I can't fault them ethically for taking advantage.
- sremani 8y ago
  Railroading people was legal too. So were many other heinous things. That should not stop people from expressing their distaste for certain "legal" practices. What are we doing here, other than sharing opinions and arguments?
  - solarkraft 8y ago
    > Railroading people was legal too And it shouldn't have been.
- bzbarsky 8y ago
  > The legal system should work to make ethical things legal and unethical things illegal. As a blanket statement, not it should not. As a counterexample, consider that the whole purpose of the US First Amendment as regards speech is that it should not be illegal to speak, even if others don't like your speech (including because they think it's unethical). As another counterexample, the war on drugs and alcohol prohibition are examples, in the US, of people trying to make unethical things illegal. The latter is widely accepted as a failure. I'm pretty sure that eventually the former will be too. In general, trying to equate "I disapprove of X" and "X should be illegal" is a really dangerous tendency that comes and goes. It seem to be on the rise recently, unfortunately, at least in the US...
  - solarkraft 8y ago
    In my view drug prohibition is the attempt to make an ethical thing illegal. You can still defend somebody's right to speak (from an ethical pov) if you don't like what they say. These things don't have to be easy. I don't see what you're getting at. Laws are to govern things people should or shouldn't do - ethics are opinions on what people should or should not do. Am I missing something?
    - bzbarsky 8y ago
      > Laws are to govern things people should or shouldn't do In RFC terms, laws are MUST and MUST NOT. Ethics are SHOULD and SHOULD NOT. There's a difference between those, even in RFCs. There is a similar difference in laws+ethics.
cascom 8y ago
Cheating on your spouse is not ethical but it is legal, would you argue for it to become illegal? My point is that it is not a given that ethically dubious actions should be illegal. Furthermore, what is ethically wrong to some may not be so for others.
- sremani 8y ago
  But if some one cheats in my family, I will use social shaming to put some heat on them. Our criticism on HN will not even have that effect, but its the closest thing to it. That's all. My only point is, "its legal" is not a pass from being socially judged by us plebs.
- mdorazio 8y ago
  No it's not? In 20 states adultery is an actual crime, and in most others it is a significant factor in determining divorce outcomes.
- DannyBee 8y ago
  I agree with what you are trying to say, but i must point out: this example may not prove what you think "Cheating on your spouse is not ethical but it is legal, would you argue for it to become illegal?" It was and is in fact illegal for many years precisely because people found it not ethical enough. In english common law, it was even a felony. It is changing (and has changed in a lot of states) precisely because people are more okay with it than they were. In practice, the legality of things is generally decided by the societal consensus around "ethical dubiousness".
  - hermitdev 8y ago
    In some jurisdictions in the US, I think it is still illegal to cheat on your spouse, or to knowingly have relations with a person that is married. I think it's a civil penalty, usually not criminal. e.g. The cheated-on spouse would have to file a lawsuit. I don't have anything concrete to cite, just vague memories of a few news articles in the past decade.
    - 8y ago
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
DannyBee 8y ago
Well, criminal law is, for the most part, a representation of consensus around ethics. If everyone thought it was ethically cool to murder others, it would be legal to murder others. It's true you cannot replace legal with ethical, but the above should tell you the reason why: Your definition of what is ethical has not reached enough consensus to be legal/illegal. It's fine to say others should have your moral values and have arguments why. But expecting them to and scoffing at them for not doing so is silly - this is literally the stuff that makes legality not black and white.
- DannyBee 8y ago
  and to try to help , the distinction one would try to normally draw here is not about ethics. Legality almost always follows ethical consensus Really it's about legality vs social aberrance. Which is not the same as ethics.
fixermark 8y ago
I don't think it's not permissible, but I think the burden of proof is on those who complain about a company's (or any person's, really) tax practices to clarify how it's unethical to read and follow the law.

solarkraft 8y ago

The legal system should work to make ethical things legal and unethical things illegal. This is legal. I can't fault them ethically for taking advantage.

sremani 8y ago
Railroading people was legal too. So were many other heinous things. That should not stop people from expressing their distaste for certain "legal" practices. What are we doing here, other than sharing opinions and arguments?
- solarkraft 8y ago
  > Railroading people was legal too And it shouldn't have been.
bzbarsky 8y ago
> The legal system should work to make ethical things legal and unethical things illegal. As a blanket statement, not it should not. As a counterexample, consider that the whole purpose of the US First Amendment as regards speech is that it should not be illegal to speak, even if others don't like your speech (including because they think it's unethical). As another counterexample, the war on drugs and alcohol prohibition are examples, in the US, of people trying to make unethical things illegal. The latter is widely accepted as a failure. I'm pretty sure that eventually the former will be too. In general, trying to equate "I disapprove of X" and "X should be illegal" is a really dangerous tendency that comes and goes. It seem to be on the rise recently, unfortunately, at least in the US...
- solarkraft 8y ago
  In my view drug prohibition is the attempt to make an ethical thing illegal. You can still defend somebody's right to speak (from an ethical pov) if you don't like what they say. These things don't have to be easy. I don't see what you're getting at. Laws are to govern things people should or shouldn't do - ethics are opinions on what people should or should not do. Am I missing something?
  - bzbarsky 8y ago
    > Laws are to govern things people should or shouldn't do In RFC terms, laws are MUST and MUST NOT. Ethics are SHOULD and SHOULD NOT. There's a difference between those, even in RFCs. There is a similar difference in laws+ethics.

cascom 8y ago

Cheating on your spouse is not ethical but it is legal, would you argue for it to become illegal? My point is that it is not a given that ethically dubious actions should be illegal. Furthermore, what is ethically wrong to some may not be so for others.

sremani 8y ago
But if some one cheats in my family, I will use social shaming to put some heat on them. Our criticism on HN will not even have that effect, but its the closest thing to it. That's all. My only point is, "its legal" is not a pass from being socially judged by us plebs.
mdorazio 8y ago
No it's not? In 20 states adultery is an actual crime, and in most others it is a significant factor in determining divorce outcomes.
DannyBee 8y ago
I agree with what you are trying to say, but i must point out: this example may not prove what you think "Cheating on your spouse is not ethical but it is legal, would you argue for it to become illegal?" It was and is in fact illegal for many years precisely because people found it not ethical enough. In english common law, it was even a felony. It is changing (and has changed in a lot of states) precisely because people are more okay with it than they were. In practice, the legality of things is generally decided by the societal consensus around "ethical dubiousness".
- hermitdev 8y ago
  In some jurisdictions in the US, I think it is still illegal to cheat on your spouse, or to knowingly have relations with a person that is married. I think it's a civil penalty, usually not criminal. e.g. The cheated-on spouse would have to file a lawsuit. I don't have anything concrete to cite, just vague memories of a few news articles in the past decade.
  - 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

DannyBee 8y ago

Well, criminal law is, for the most part, a representation of consensus around ethics. If everyone thought it was ethically cool to murder others, it would be legal to murder others. It's true you cannot replace legal with ethical, but the above should tell you the reason why: Your definition of what is ethical has not reached enough consensus to be legal/illegal. It's fine to say others should have your moral values and have arguments why. But expecting them to and scoffing at them for not doing so is silly - this is literally the stuff that makes legality not black and white.

DannyBee 8y ago
and to try to help , the distinction one would try to normally draw here is not about ethics. Legality almost always follows ethical consensus Really it's about legality vs social aberrance. Which is not the same as ethics.

fixermark 8y ago

I don't think it's not permissible, but I think the burden of proof is on those who complain about a company's (or any person's, really) tax practices to clarify how it's unethical to read and follow the law.