Good grief.To quote Albaby WAY UP in this thread:At bottom, Scalia posits, everything that legislatures legislate about rest on a conception of the Good - some moral judgment that some outcomes are better than other outcomes, or reaching the conclusion that society that looks one way is better than a society that looks another way.You guys keep going around in circles while ignoring the basic truth - that moral judgements, regardless of whether you approve of them or not, are how we craft laws.Look at any significant change in law over the last century and you can tie it to a change in the perception of morals.Contracts between two adults (and even the definition of who is a consenting adult) is based on morals. Simple fact.Why do we legally prohibit a sterile woman from marrying her son? They can't conceive. There is no risk of birth defects. This would not be a same sex marriage, yet as a society, we deam such illegal based on current morals. Decades ago, it was common for people to get married as young as 13 and start a family. Today, such behavior is generally illegal because of the change in morals.You and everyone else is welcome to argue that the morals of any particular law are wrong, but the fact remains that such are how our laws are generally determined.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Rat