3 ms·

Isn't the point (or at least on of the most important points) of law and the justice system to protect from harm (and handle those who violate laws)? Thus, if

Isn't the point (or at least on of the most important points) of law and the justice system to protect from harm (and handle those who violate laws)? Thus, if it's legal then the company is doing nothing wrong. If they're harming someone then laws should change - which is what the democratic/legislative arm is for - and law suits should be filed. I'm not against a company having a moral stance but to implicate all those that don't as bad moral actors when they system is set up the way it is seems a tad invidious.

presentation 6y ago
The whole point of politics is that the law does not and cannot fully capture what’s right and wrong. Just because something is legal, it doesn’t mean it isn’t wrong, and I don’t like the idea that companies ought to act as though that’s the case.
- brigandish 6y ago
  > The whole point of politics is that the law does not and cannot fully capture what’s right and wrong. The perfect is the enemy of the good. Legislators work to try and capture what is right for now and the future, and in common law jurisdictions a claimant may (sometimes) sue and not have to wait for legislation. As I wrote, I'm not against anyone taking a positive moral stance but since there's no way to know or even agree on what is moral, to say that it's immoral to take no stance other than to work within the law (which is a already a very extensive moral code) would seem invidious.