Well, that the law is wrong on one aspect does not mean it is wrong for every thing. We should strive making the law match what is morally right, but law ≠ mor

Well, that the law is wrong on one aspect does not mean it is wrong for every thing. We should strive making the law match what is morally right, but law ≠ morally right. There are lawful things that are morally wrong and conversely. This is difficult because: - it is difficult for the law to keep up with every aspect of things - "morally right" is not universal. It is proper to each person. My take is: don't use the law as a definition of what is right and keep being critical. Breaking the law might be the right thing to do in some situations (and not breaking it, the wrong thing to do!), but be aware of the consequences of doing so. Law is also a common ground to make a society work by getting people to act under the same rules, so it makes sense to abide by it if there is not a good reason not to do so. It's not perfect and does not make sense for some things. It can also evolve for the better through civil disobedience, which is a bit paradoxical because while society relies on people following the law, breaking it in this situation may be a right thing to do (depending on your views!). (edit: I'm saying this as someone who, by default, does not much like laws and rules. I need to make sense of rules to follow them without reluctance)