Slash Boxes
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

phillup (4419)

  (email not shown publicly)

Journal of phillup (4419)

Friday April 22, 2005
10:24 AM

This is so wrong

[ #24317 ]

"Laws must be in accordance with the well-being of the human person, that is the key condition for a law to be respected,"
"If the law goes directly against true values then it is not a law, since an unjust law just ceases to exist," said Archbishop Karlic.


Update: I just noticed that this article was from 2001. So, change tense as appropriate.

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • A law that requires institutions to provide birth-prevention methods to children without their parents' consent ... wow.
  • The quotes seem reasonable. The application is reasonable - for both sides.

    A person has a responsibility to oppose immoral laws, but of course, there may be consequences is that opposition includes breaking the laws in question.

    The archbishop being quoted obviously feels that the law is immoral and must be opposed.

    The people who passed the law, I'm sure, feel that the rights of the children to get accurate information that the children want and have requested and which could vitally affect the rest of

    • The archbishop being quoted obviously feels that the law is immoral and must be opposed.

      I guess this is the part I have a problem with.

      It is alright, apparently, for the church to advocate breaking the law.

      What about those that don't believe in god? Can they also decide, based on their own moral code to break the law?

      What if I'm a Satan worshipper? Can I use the tenets of my religion to guide me in these areas... deciding which laws are "OK" to follow and which not?

      OK... those are actually thought que
      • If the church can advocate breaking the law, any organization should be able to suggest laws it doesn't like and advocate that people ignore them.

        Sure, any organization can advocate breaking the law, but must live with the consequences. Actually breaking the law carries consequences. Conspiracy to break the law carries consequences. Misusing a position of trust or power to induce others to break the law carries consequences. Claiming that a law is immoral and should be ignored may fit into one of thos