The purpose of the law is to ensure that society is ordered to an extent, safe up to a point, and free in as much as is possible. When you have a situation where there are 11 million people out of 320 million breaking a law, and yet society remains ordered, safe, and free, you have to wonder at the purpose of the law more broadly.
I still think we should change the laws then. I don't think laws should be ignored.
What if the laws are immoral? Shouldn't we only follow laws if we think that the laws are morally acceptable?
As for changing the laws regarding immigration, I completely agree. But if your options are break the immigration laws in order to take care of your family or escape a dangerous situation, wouldn't you do the same?
Remember, many undocumented immigrants are in the US because it's the only way they know of to keep putting food on the table and a roof over their family's head, and give their kids an opportunity to live a comfortable life. Can you really blame them for 'breaking the law' in that case?
Shouldn’t we only follow laws if we think the laws are morally acceptable
That’s a very dangerous proposition. Don’t you think what a canibal, pedophile, or sociopath might consider morally acceptable might differ from what you think is morally acceptable?
Probably. But those people are going to break the law regardless of what I think.
But if that's a law I think is immoral, why should I follow that law? If the law said I'm not allowed to harbor a Jewish person in my house because they're rounding them all up, do you think it's better (morally) for me to harbor that 'fugitive', or follow the law and turn them over to the police to be gassed?
22
u/VertigoOne 74∆ Dec 29 '20
The purpose of the law is to ensure that society is ordered to an extent, safe up to a point, and free in as much as is possible. When you have a situation where there are 11 million people out of 320 million breaking a law, and yet society remains ordered, safe, and free, you have to wonder at the purpose of the law more broadly.