| If law were based solely on morality, we'd never make any legal decisions because morality is a never ending debate (sort of like this one). Philosophy of law is full of various theories, but the current practice of law is based on the laws themselves, not ethics. Judges are not supposed to decide cases based on their personal moral judgements, but on whether the evidence shows a written law was violated.
Laws are human creations based on current societal needs. Hopefully the laws of our time respect our individual ethics (even God allows free will - so why not get rid of all laws? Because that would cause a pretty messy society.).
Killing another human is almost universally agreed upon as morally wrong, yet the law allows for many circumstances in which it is not - during war, in the US capital punishment, self defense, etc. War is a good example. Most moral codes don't say "thou shalt not kill, except when ordered to by a superior". But often people do what they must instead of what they morally believe to be right - and it is legal.
Law (current law in the United States, which is different than law in other countries at other times) protects the inalienable human rights you speak of. If (and no this isn't a given) the human-to-be is considered to have these rights before birth, this human-to-be's right to life may be in contradiction with the mother's right to liberty or the pursuit of happiness. Clash of rights.
But that's a whole different debate... sorry for getting kind of off topic here.
In order for democracy to function, citizens need to have access to unfiltered information: independent news portal |