[ SECRET POST #2665 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2665 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 064 secrets from Secret Submission Post #381.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[diet_poison]

"it's illegal" =/= "it's wrong" seriously that is such a stupid and arguably damaging attitude

[(Anonymous)]

...so you don't think there's anything at all wrong with doing something knowingly illegal? Even if you disagree with the law you have to admit that there is wrongdoing in not following it.

[(Anonymous)]

Noobody has to admit any such thing. There is noncomformity, controversy and risk in not following it, certainly, but whether that in itself (independent of what the law in question happens to address, which is a whole different can of worms) equals 'wrongdoing' depends on your moral framework. Authoritarian types tend to believe so, but not everyone is an authoritarian.

[diet_poison]

In and of itself, no. Law =/= morality.

Of course, something can be both wrong and illegal. And doing something illegal can also be wrong because of complications/consequences that can result. But just because something is illegal doesn't make it wrong.

ETA: holy shit, I actually forgot what conversation this was in since it's one of two recent law-related conversations ummmm

yeah sorry for pot smoking I got nothing, there is literally no way to argue that the law is actually protecting human rights or public safety (obviously don't do stupid stuff like drive high but just smoking a joint doesn't automatically imply that). I think the law in and of itself is, in fact, wrong and not doing what laws should do.

You can make a case for it being morally wrong (I'm not sure whether or not I would agree), but here are the two possibilities:

1. it is morally wrong, in which case doing it is already wrong with no influence necessary from the law, or

2. it is not morally wrong, in which case you need to ask yourself, if the government made eating pasta illegal, or owning a dog, or wearing purple shirts, or anything else that pretty much everyone else can agree is not morally wrong, would you stop doing it, and would you actually make the assertion that it's no longer ok and is now automatically wrong only because of the law?