Can Law and Morality Exist Together
The law affects all aspects of life, as it regulates the behavior of the social members of the foundation at the critical level and it also influences and extends from birth to after our death. In every developed society, a very complicated set of rules is issued and implemented to control the activities of its members. These laws regulate working conditions by establishing minimum health and safety standards. The law also covers moral lifestyles in the community, such as banning alcohol on buses and trains that go to football matches. Other laws have expanded the provisions that control personal relationships and prohibit incestuous marriages.12 Given the above, in the absence of a law, there would be lazy members of the community, as there would be laws that degrade society. For example, without the requirement that prohibits marriage between parents, it could exist across different races around the world. In the nature of morality and law, people are obliged to take care of their neighbors against both attacks and protect them from acts of eradication that affect others. Morality forbids the indecent act of misconduct towards others and, according to the law, it boils down to punishment. In Donoghue v.
Stevenson, Lord Atkin formulated a legal principle based on the moral principle and deliberately adapted it to the requirements of the first. “When morality says that I must love my neighbor, the law requires that I not hurt my neighbor,” Atkin.17 In the law, the neighbor is any person so close and direct that he can be influenced by the act of his neighbor. In this sense, Lord Atkin establishes a strong link between the legal system and the law, which introduces their correlation between the two entities. In Stevenson v. Donoghue, the plaintiff took with him the drinks produced by the defendants. The drink contained decomposed snails. As a result, the plaintiff suffered the shock at the sight of the snail.18 The court ruled that each person is obliged to take care of another, and the neighbor owes this obligation even without the existing contract between the manufacturer and the consumer. In view of the above facts, law and morality take into account the relationship between the members of the community. Morality and law guide consumable manufacturers or manufacturers as such, law and honesty are the basic units for community development, as they both prohibit immoral acts such as murder.
Several provisions of tort and criminal law deal with the general obligation that neighbours must be morally and legally protected. Laws have often supplanted moral principles and traditions. For example, it is moral to visit temples and hold religious festivals, but in some situations, such as during a pandemic, temples are closed and religious processions are stopped for a limited time by enforcing a government order. In this case, the people had no choice but to follow the legal systems of the government. Therefore, under certain conditions, morality takes a back seat and the law becomes a master. In ancient India, it was their Dharma that was considered both a morality and a law. With a careful examination of their opinions, one can understand that the ideas of the two philosophers can certainly be satisfied halfway. Morality and law do not need to be two far-fetched ideas and may have some overlap between them. However, the legal world will have to rule over what people might believe, since morality is subjective. Life relationships were often scrutinized by society.
Although it is legal, there are many moral judgments that follow. In S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal (2010), the Honourable Supreme Court concluded that cohabitation is legally recognized as a “family relationship” and therefore protected by the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. It has been established that a life relationship falls within the scope of the right to life enshrined in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Life relationships can still be studied for moral reasons by some people in India as much as one wants, but they are legal because law and morality are not equal. Contrary to the above, the assertion that all laws are commandments to some extent has limitations. Indeed, some rules provide for change and adoption processes, but do not affect the way of life in the community. In addition, part of the law highlights only favorable laws that make existing laws declaratory. In addition, the repeal laws are still present, which form the ordinances. The law of imperfection should contain effective sanctions such as the rules of morality or the rules of universal law. (However, this does not mean that traffic rules are completely arbitrary.
After all, they are based on survival considerations. They exist out of human concern for safety. As a result, a number of important discoveries in physics are taken into account when setting speed and other limits. The facts of nature become an external point of reference in this case, but a God still doesn`t matter.) But over time, law and morality were seen as unequal to each other. However, law is not necessarily the same as morality; There are many moral rules that are not regulated by human legal authorities. And so the question arises of how to have a feasible set of moral guidelines when there is no one to apply them. Laws and rules are generally designed to regulate activities that can be observed publicly. This facilitates law enforcement. But violations of moral principles are a horse of a different color. They often involve actions that are not illegal, but simply unethical, and can involve private and hard-to-observe actions without infringing on that privacy. The execution is therefore almost entirely left to the author. Others may work on the abuser`s emotions to promote guilt or shame, but they have no real control over the abuser`s behavior.
Hart criticized 8 principles of legality. He said that these principles are only a means of efficiency. These principles cannot be called morality. Proponents of positivism argue that law and morality are for the most part separate entities.19 In contrast, proponents of the theory of natural law have argued that law and morality should function synchronously. Law and honesty are the close entities that each cannot function without the presence of the other.20 Good morality helps shape good laws, and false mores are associated with the adoption of immoral actions, and vice versa.
