"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so.

steddyeddy

This is a quote attributed to Thomas Jefferson. I personally agree with it. If a law is unjust it should be broken. For example if a man is gay in a country where it is illegal you can't possibly expect him to obey that can you? The only issue with this view imo is what is considered unjust is very subjective. Do you think the law comes before what you consider to be just or that personal ideas of justice should come before the law of the land?

Edited for clarity: Does legality go hand in hand with morality. Is it ever immoral not to break a law?

Further edit: My thinking here is in relation to laws retrospectively seen as unjust slavery ect and laws a sizeable amount of people consider unjust. NOTHING to do with property tax or any monetary regulation in Ireland today.

JustAddWater

steddyeddy wrote: »

This is a quote attributed to Thomas Jefferson. I personally agree with it. If a law is unjust it should be broken. For example if a man is gay in a country where it is illegal you can't possibly expect him to obey that can you? The only issue with this view imo is what is considered unjust is very subjective. Do you think the law comes before what you consider to be just or that personal ideas of justice should come before the law of the land?

Great, let's all be selective and follow laws only when it suits us

smash

Are you Ben Gilroy?

steddyeddy

JustAddWater wrote: »

Great, let's all be selective and follow laws only when it suits us

Well put it this way if you were black (maybe you are) and the law said you could be bought and sold under the one drop rule would you follow it?

Tail Docker

JustAddWater wrote: »

Great, let's all be selective and follow laws only when it suits us

Fair enough. I'll run with that. Good post, good suggestion.

wazky

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well put it this way if you were black (maybe you are) and the law said you could be bought and sold under the one drop rule would you follow it?

More than likely because you would be in chains and slavers weren't usually ones for taking the opinions of their workforce...

steddyeddy

wazky wrote: »

More than likely cause you would be in chains and slavers weren't usually ones for taking the opinions of their workforce...

But you certainly wouldn't respect it I hope.

wazky

steddyeddy wrote: »

But you certainly wouldn't respect it I hope.

I probably wouldn't be fully committed to the idea no, I'm missing you point? I don't like a law so therefore I don't follow it?

JustAddWater

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well put it this way if you were black (maybe you are) and the law said you could be bought and sold under the one drop rule would you follow it?

I wouldn't like it but there are ways to have laws changed/challenged

You can't just decide upon yourself that you personally don't like the law therefore you aren't going to follow it

From tomorrow, I've decided traffic lights are unjust...

steddyeddy

wazky wrote: »

I probably wouldn't be fully committed to the idea no, I'm missing you point? I don't like a law so therefore I don't follow it?

I mean if the law is unjust then it shouldn't be obeyed. That's all.

Guy:Incognito

steddyeddy wrote: »

I mean if the law is unjust then it shouldn't be obeyed. That's all.

Who decides if its unjust?

steddyeddy

JustAddWater wrote: »

I wouldn't like it but there are ways to have laws changed/challenged

You can't just decide upon yourself that you personally don't like the law therefore you aren't going to follow it

From tomorrow, I've decided traffic lights are unjust...

Sorry but I disagree if the law is a tool of apartheid for instance you most certainly shouldn't follow it. Are you comparing traffic lights to slavery? Some laws are more unjust than others.

wazky

steddyeddy wrote: »

I mean if the law is unjust then it shouldn't be obeyed. That's all.

So if I decided that outlawing beastality is unjust, I can just go out and take my pick of the nearest sheep without fear of repercussions?

Frank Lee Midere

wazky wrote: »

I probably wouldn't be fully committed to the idea no, I'm missing you point? I don't like a law so therefore I don't follow it?

If it is unjust. I mean it's hardly rocket science, this.

The_Pretender

One person on their own will make fcuk all difference. If you think a law is unjust, then find out what other people think and campaign to have it changed. Only if enough people are in favour of it should something be done. People can think thry are correct in the way they think, but it could be very different to how the geeral population thinks. And of course once it doesn't upset anyone's basic human rights.

steddyeddy

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Who decides if its unjust?

That's the point I was making. It's highly subjective but if a law involves the denigration of another person then I think most would think it unjust.

Frank Lee Midere

wazky wrote: »

So if I decided that outlawing beastality is unjust, I can just go out and take my pick of the nearest sheep without fear of repercussions?

Yeah. But then you would go to jail. And we would laugh.

Putin

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Who decides if its unjust?

Probably an individuals own personal moral code and sense of justice & fairness.

wazky

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

If it is unjust. I mean it's hardly rocket science, this.

Who decides what is unjust and what is not?

A load a sh1te if I ever heard it, in Ireland anyway we live in free country and dont have to worry about being enslaved or having our hands cut off if we are homosexual.

The Peanut

I'll have a look at this thread in the morning and view the carnage.

steddyeddy

wazky wrote: »

Who decides what is unjust and what is not?

A load a sh1te if I ever heard it, in Ireland anyway we live in free country and dont have to worry about being enslaved or having our hands cut off if we are homosexual.

But what if we did? For instance Ireland wasn't always a progressive country (some would argue it's not now).

kneemos

steddyeddy wrote: »

I mean if the law is unjust then it shouldn't be obeyed. That's all.

Unjust laws tend to be changed eventually.Laws such as slavery were accepted at the time so weren't considered unjust.
Our abortion laws are probably a good example of unjust.

Manach

Given the a majority of law is either from European Directives, The European Court of human rights or crafted from the law reform commission (composed of academics) and that studies have shown that the legislative branch rarely if ever inquire about the laws that are passed - the question should instead be re-phrased into how to we get to pass laws that are reflective of the people's public good instead of the elites/lobbyists.

catallus

Democracy depends on the law and vice-versa. And democracy only works if our loyalty to the collective is more powerful than our insistence on our own righteousness.

I read that on a fridge magnet one time

wazky

steddyeddy wrote: »

But what if we did?

We don't, so don't worry your pretty little head about it.

Having to obey a traffic light or weed not being legal isn't really on the same level is it?

steddyeddy

wazky wrote: »

We don't, so don't worry your pretty little head about it.

Having to obey a traffic light or weed not being legal isn't really on the same level is it?

Wazky did you ever hear of a thought experiment? Well this is one. And thanks for calling me pretty XCOXOXOXOXOOOXO

Manach

kneemos wrote: »

Our abortion laws are probably a good example of unjust.

So the deliberate targeting for death of the unborn is unjust - I fear the goddess dike is weeping.

JustAddWater

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

If it is unjust. I mean it's hardly rocket science, this.

I've decided rockets are unjust

Frank Lee Midere

wazky wrote: »

Who decides what is unjust and what is not?

A load a sh1te if I ever heard it, in Ireland anyway we live in free country and dont have to worry about being enslaved or having our hands cut off if we are homosexual.

But presumably you - since you sneer at any injustice in this or any system - would think that being enslaved or having a hand cut off is just if it is legal.

If you don't. You agree with steddyeddy.

wazky

JustAddWater wrote: »

I've decided rockets are unjust

I've decided that decisions are unjust.

Frank Lee Midere

Right Wazky. Imagine a thought experiment. You have been arrested for being not very good at thought experiments. The penalty is

1) your hands are to be cut off
2) you are to be castrated.
3) you are to be forced to listen to Justin bieber via a permanent ear implant.

But before the sentence can be carried out the door is open in your cell. Do you avoid justice by running away? Or stay because who are you to challenge the law?

steddyeddy

My OP is edited thus:

Edited for clarity: Does legality go hand in hand with morality. Is it ever immoral not to break a law?

the groutch

stop moaning OP, and just pay your TV license fee

wazky

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

Right Wazky. Imagine a thought experiment. You have been arrested for being not very good at thought experiments. The penalty is

1) your hands are to be cut off
2) you are to be castrated.
3) you are to be forced to listen to Justin bieber via a permanent ear implant.

But before the sentence can be carried out the door is open in your cell. Do you avoid justice by running away? Or stay because who are you to challenge the law?

I have my hands cut off as I've always fancied having hooks, they look quite snazzy.

steddyeddy

Just to clarify when I started this thread it was because this quote is framed on the side of UCD's new law building. I haven't any Irish laws in mind at the moment.

Shakespeare's Sister

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Who decides if its unjust?

When people are being harmed.
It doesn't apply here, but it does apply in e.g. Uganda, Saudi Arabia.

You'd be sorry if you disobeyed laws in those countries though, in fairness - fierce easy for the lad whose quote that is, to be going on about "obligated" to break it.
It's from another time though, when even in democracies there were unjust laws - e.g. the segregated Deep South in the US.

Mark Tapley

I think there is still a blasphemy law which is God damned awful.

MightyMandarin

That's great OP, except what is unjust in my eyes, may be otherwise in someone else, rendering this quote completely useless and way, way too simple for something far more complex.

Sunnyisland

Divorce WAS an unjust law and widely broken law in this country not to long ago and I agreed in breaking that law.

Mr. Incognito

If you dont like the law, vote for the other guy or run yourself

steddyeddy

MightyMandarin wrote: »

That's great OP, except what is unjust in my eyes, may be otherwise in someone else, rendering this quote completely useless and way, way too simple for something far more complex.

Well would you have a problem breaking a law that is unjust in your eyes? EG enslave a man?

Sociopath2

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well would you have a problem breaking a law that is unjust in your eyes? EG enslave a man?

I'd have no problem breaking the laws against slavery. I'd enslave a few useful people and make my life easier

steddyeddy

Sociopath2 wrote: »

I'd have no problem breaking the laws against slavery.

Well then you have no problem breaking unjust laws.

Sociopath2

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well then you have no problem breaking unjust laws.

I agree, the laws against slavery are unjust. Why shouldn't I enslave someone if I am able to?

MightyMandarin

Sociopath2 wrote: »

I'd have no problem breaking the laws against slavery. I'd enslave a few useful people and make my life easier

Yeah ok stuff like slavery or killing people because they're gay etc. is wrong. But the way the OP has phrased it, I would have a right to not pay the TV licence, simply because I think it's 'unjust'.

View

steddyeddy wrote: »

Just to clarify when I started this thread it was because this quote is framed on the side of UCD's new law building. I haven't any Irish laws in mind at the moment.

The quotation is fake.

Any school of law displaying such a contemptuous attitude to the rule of law should be disbanded.

Bafucin

Sociopath2 wrote: »

I agree, the laws against slavery are unjust. Why shouldn't I enslave someone if I am able to?

Why shouldn't we make you obey laws we like if we are able to?

You is our bitch. We are the majority. Our empathic whims have no mercy.

You can't enslave someone because we won't let you...which means in a way you are our slave. Which is fine because you seem to think the laws against slavery are unjust anyway.

steddyeddy

MightyMandarin wrote: »

Yeah ok stuff like slavery or killing people because they're gay etc. is wrong. But the way the OP has phrased it, I would have a right to not pay the TV licence, simply because I think it's 'unjust'.

It's phrased with only the quote in mind. If a law causes harm, discriminates ect. It's also a thought experiment.

dxhound2005

A lot of this thinking seems to have become more prevalent since property tax and water charges were mooted. It is essentially Freeman on the Land stuff. Before that it usually featured in TV licence discussions. And always with some reference to slavery and apartheid.

How very convenient that this high moral stance on human rights just happens to justify people not paying out money.

steddyeddy

View wrote: »

The quotation is fake.

Any school of law displaying such a contemptuous attitude to the rule of law should be disbanded.

So there is no law throughout history or location that you would feel obliged to break? If so you agree with the quote. The quote is right IMO because it's common sense. Law is constructed by people for the people. If I think a law goes against that then I will disobey it.

steddyeddy

dxhound2005 wrote: »

A lot of this thinking seems to have become more prevalent since property tax and water charges were mooted. It is essentially Freeman on the Land stuff. Before that it usually featured in TV licence discussions. And always with some reference to slavery and apartheid.

How very convenient that this high moral stance on human rights just happens to justify people not paying out money.

Right I'm editing my OP again. It is nothing to do with any monetary law or regulation in this country at the moment.