The Limits of the Law
I am constantly returning to one focal thought: that law cannot legislate morality, and that most of the family and relationships is morality.
Law cannot legislate that one person loves another. That is the madness of arranged marriages. They only "work" by chance or with a great deal of pressure -- legal, physical, economic and/or social -- applied. Even then, when they work it surprises even the spouses involved.
Law cannot legislate how someone loves another person. Those who have suffered emotional or physical trauma express their love for others differently than what is considered "normal." It is something they cannot help, and suffer with every day of their lives. Can someone craft a law that allows this expression of love? -- Of course not.
The law is limited to discriminating against one thing or another. Yet is cannot force "normalcy" on anyone.
If law attempts to dictate the way one person loves another, it becomes a tool for discrimination, abuse, and ultimately brainwashing. Are those acceptable goals for legislation? I don't think so.
The only thing law can do in such circumstances is guarantee people the right to privacy and freedom to offer them a chance to outgrow their wounds, physical and/or mental.
Law cannot dictate that a parent loves a child, either in the affirmative or negative.
Currently, the law seems to dictate that a mother loves children more than a father. Even to write those words sounds ludicrous!
How can such love be measured? It is certainly not in dollars and cents.
Is it to be measured in the amount of time the parent spends with the child? Or the number of dollars a parent spends on the child? These measures are ever more ludicrous, and far beyond the realistic application of any law.
How do you compare the hours a housewife spends with her children to the hours a husband spends working to provide for the household? I've seen some weird attempts.
My mind roams to attempts to place a market value on the functions of a housewife. Then the logic returns to the concept of 'market value' more rigorously, and the market for her work is really dictated by the amount her husband earns. And round and round it goes...
How do you value a child? or children? If a household splits, and each spouse gets 50%, then with two children (or more) the custodial parent (--nearly 90% of the time the mother--) gets another 20%. So that means each child is worth 10% or less of whatever is divided, based on market value, -Right?
These silly rationales begin to sound like an attempt to make a market for children. As if they could be resold.
The madness goes further since that is exactly what social services, lawyers, and courts are doing.
It could be said that the legal system simply allows the parents to pay lawyers for the right to have their children. -- It's really not that far-fetched a conclusion. -- While the state pays police, bureaucracy, and social workers to supervise the sale of the children. Like any state-controlled market, it just doesn't work.
Soon it becomes apparent that justice and law itself are for sale. If you don't have the price, then you can't buy "justice." You have to make due with the prejudices or whims of the court and its courtiers.
Does a parent love a child any less if they don't have the money for an attorney? Based on the structures of the current legal system, the answer is Yes.
The courts and laws do not deal with subjects such as Love, and resentfully deal with injury, disability and age. These are issues that are really moral issues. They are beyond the concept of law for the most part, other than the most rudimentary rights.
Paul
Law cannot legislate that one person loves another. That is the madness of arranged marriages. They only "work" by chance or with a great deal of pressure -- legal, physical, economic and/or social -- applied. Even then, when they work it surprises even the spouses involved.
Law cannot legislate how someone loves another person. Those who have suffered emotional or physical trauma express their love for others differently than what is considered "normal." It is something they cannot help, and suffer with every day of their lives. Can someone craft a law that allows this expression of love? -- Of course not.
The law is limited to discriminating against one thing or another. Yet is cannot force "normalcy" on anyone.
If law attempts to dictate the way one person loves another, it becomes a tool for discrimination, abuse, and ultimately brainwashing. Are those acceptable goals for legislation? I don't think so.
The only thing law can do in such circumstances is guarantee people the right to privacy and freedom to offer them a chance to outgrow their wounds, physical and/or mental.
Law cannot dictate that a parent loves a child, either in the affirmative or negative.
Currently, the law seems to dictate that a mother loves children more than a father. Even to write those words sounds ludicrous!
How can such love be measured? It is certainly not in dollars and cents.
Is it to be measured in the amount of time the parent spends with the child? Or the number of dollars a parent spends on the child? These measures are ever more ludicrous, and far beyond the realistic application of any law.
How do you compare the hours a housewife spends with her children to the hours a husband spends working to provide for the household? I've seen some weird attempts.
My mind roams to attempts to place a market value on the functions of a housewife. Then the logic returns to the concept of 'market value' more rigorously, and the market for her work is really dictated by the amount her husband earns. And round and round it goes...
How do you value a child? or children? If a household splits, and each spouse gets 50%, then with two children (or more) the custodial parent (--nearly 90% of the time the mother--) gets another 20%. So that means each child is worth 10% or less of whatever is divided, based on market value, -Right?
These silly rationales begin to sound like an attempt to make a market for children. As if they could be resold.
The madness goes further since that is exactly what social services, lawyers, and courts are doing.
It could be said that the legal system simply allows the parents to pay lawyers for the right to have their children. -- It's really not that far-fetched a conclusion. -- While the state pays police, bureaucracy, and social workers to supervise the sale of the children. Like any state-controlled market, it just doesn't work.
Soon it becomes apparent that justice and law itself are for sale. If you don't have the price, then you can't buy "justice." You have to make due with the prejudices or whims of the court and its courtiers.
Does a parent love a child any less if they don't have the money for an attorney? Based on the structures of the current legal system, the answer is Yes.
The courts and laws do not deal with subjects such as Love, and resentfully deal with injury, disability and age. These are issues that are really moral issues. They are beyond the concept of law for the most part, other than the most rudimentary rights.
Paul
posted by Unknown at
12:45 PM
Social bookmark this
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home