Debate Guide: It's wrong because it's illegal: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
The Admins (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
:''"Having sex with [kids, minors, children] is wrong, period. Because its illegal"'' | :''"Having sex with [kids, minors, children] is wrong, period. Because its illegal"'' | ||
Nothing is wrong because it's illegal. Law is a flexible system of moral judgements, which vary according to the place on earth and the time in history. Laws, being written before and not after the act and involving nothing more than subjective judgements, have no ethical authority over the rightness of any practice. One example that demonstrates this is | Nothing is wrong because it's illegal. Law is a flexible system of moral judgements, which vary according to the place on earth and the time in history. Laws, being written before and not after the act and involving nothing more than subjective judgements, have no ethical authority over the rightness of any practice. One example that demonstrates this is gay sex. According to your legalistic morality, gay sex has gone from being 'wrong' to 'more / totally acceptable' in a number of recent societies. Gay sex would also be wrong in some present societies that outlaw it, but not elsewhere! If the circular reasoning of "illegal = wrong = illegal" was a vaild argument, all forms of deregulation would be automatically immoral or potentially dangerous, meaning that there would be no acceptable reason for the legalisation of any practise! | ||
==Fallacies and cognitive distortions covered== | ==Fallacies and cognitive distortions covered== | ||
Revision as of 02:49, 23 February 2009
- "Having sex with [kids, minors, children] is wrong, period. Because its illegal"
Nothing is wrong because it's illegal. Law is a flexible system of moral judgements, which vary according to the place on earth and the time in history. Laws, being written before and not after the act and involving nothing more than subjective judgements, have no ethical authority over the rightness of any practice. One example that demonstrates this is gay sex. According to your legalistic morality, gay sex has gone from being 'wrong' to 'more / totally acceptable' in a number of recent societies. Gay sex would also be wrong in some present societies that outlaw it, but not elsewhere! If the circular reasoning of "illegal = wrong = illegal" was a vaild argument, all forms of deregulation would be automatically immoral or potentially dangerous, meaning that there would be no acceptable reason for the legalisation of any practise!
Fallacies and cognitive distortions covered
- Circulus in probando fallacy: The reasoning behind this argument is a fallacious circular ("We know it is wrong because it was made illegal because it's wrong").
- Cognitive distortion: Musturbation.