Alan Hunt's Governing Morals: A Social History Of Moral Regulation

Summary: In chapter 1 of Moral Politics talks about that politics is about your own world view. The political division between republican and democrat is based on morality. Morality is based on the type of family backgrounds you have or family model you have such as strict father and nurturing father. And these models explain what “common sense” you have in mind, which you may not even aware of. Chapter two talks about the personal worldview problem for american politics, it will bring the questions that either you're more conservative or liberal. Both sides have their own views. It talks about why do conservatives think that morality should be their agenda. Liberals also have a paradoxical position even they also hold a moral position on

Along with being contradictory, the era was also ironic because although so many things were considered socially unacceptable, they were practiced commonly. The Victorians only wanted others to think that they lived chaste lives, but in reality they would give into human emotions. They strove to become something that they were not able to become. The main social code to live by during this period was to not to give into human temptation, to keep a calm and poised composure.

In August 2015, the case Miller V Davis brought to light the complicated relationship between law and morality. Indeed, Mrs Davis a county clerk in Rowan county (Kentucky), is being sued for not delivering marriage licences to same sex couples as she believes that homosexuality is morally wrong. Thus, despite the fact that same-sex marriage has been made legal by the U.S Supreme Court since June 2015. Ought individuals to apply the law though it is in inadequacy with their moral beliefs? Do the law should be totally free from any moral influence? Many legal scholars have argued on these questions, as well as trying to define the terms “law” and “morality”. While no one has agreed to a universal definition, law can be defined as a “body of rules, whether proceeding from formal enactment or from custom, which a particular state or community recognizes as binding on its members or subjects”. On the other hand, morality is referred to as an “ethical wisdom” , the set of common values unifying a society. This essay will discuss the role of morality in the law, while analysing different legal school of thoughts arguing on the topic. First of all, positivists such as Bentham, Austin and Hart, argued that morality should not interfere with the law as it is created by a legitimate authority. On the other hand, naturalist theorists, such as Aristotle, Fuller and Dworkin, believed in the existence of a “higher law”, highly influenced by morals, has to be integrated in a legal system

However what if, in reflecting morality, the law infringes on the rights of individuals? Can these infringements be justified? Is Legal Paternalism necessary?

The 1920’s was an age of dramatic social and political change, and most people knew this time as ‘the roaring twenties’. Most Americans lived in the cities rather than on farms and this was due to the nation’s total wealth was more than doubled and this economical growth took many Americans into the consumer society. Consumerism is the theory that it is economically attractive to encourage the attainment of goods and services in ever-increasing amounts. As money was something that everyone was willing to spend people would lose morality and not spend their money wisely. The prohibition of alcohol, adultery and wealth played a big part in the 1920’s which effected the importance of morality.

Ever since the early 17th century, the Jews in Philadelphia have been striving to become an important part of the American society, while staying true to their roots. Although the Jews faced exile from their homelands of Portugal and Spain, they were able to build and sustain a strong Jewish community within Philadelphia and pave the way for future generations through extensive actions throughout the community. They built hundreds of Jewish schools, Community Centres, synagogues and established many congregations. They became strongly involved in the American society and paved the way for many of America’s moral codes (Telushkin). There are currently 275, 850 Jews in Philadelphia, making it one of the strongest Jewish communities in the United States (Levine).

Canadian Morality and the Law   In legal theory, there is a great debate over whether or not law should be used to enforce morality.  The sides of the debate can be presented as a continuum.  At one end, there is the libertarian view, which holds that morality is an individual belief and that the state should not interfere in the affairs of the individual.  According to this view, a democracy cannot limit or enforce morality.   At the other end, there is the communitarian position, which justifies the community as a whole deciding what moral values are, and hence justifies using the law to enforce community values.  For libertarians, judges should play a prominent role in limiting the state, while for communitarians, judges should

Morality vs. Immorality Ayn Rand once said, “There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil.” In the society of today and of Ayn Rand’s novel, Atlas Shrugged, morality is the right and immorality is the wrong, but what is the evil then? The evil in both societies is the importance of money to the people and the people who step on others to climb the financial ladder. In Atlas Shrugged, one is introduced to many characters that are evil and support a corrupt government system; ; but perhaps the most obvious villain in the novel is James Taggart, president of Taggart Transcontinental Railroad.Taggart’s rival and foil character in Atlas Shrugged is Francisco d’Anconia, owner of d’Anconia Copper. Although both men have money, one is trying to monopolize his industry James Taggart, James Taggart, while the other is trying

Philosophy Essay 2 TOPIC ONE: THE BASIS OF MORALITY The basis of morality has been major area of discussion for philosophers for many years. In The Leviathan, Hobbes argues that desire and aversion determine what is good, evil, right or wrong, believing in a subjective self-interest based view on morality. In The Grounding of Metaphysics of Morals, Kant takes a rational approach, arguing that it is reason that plays a role in determining the same, thus having an objective view on morality. In my opinion, Hobbes’ account has greater validity than Kant’s in the fact that I believe it is human passion that dictates morality.

In seventeenth-century England, the crime of sodomy was considered to be a heinous sin. In a time when religion governed law, homosexuality was not tolerated. The case against Lord Audley, Earl of Castlehaven, represents the treatment of those convicted in engaging in sexual behavior with men. Not only was sodomy frowned upon because it went against God’s laws, but it was also considered a crime against honor. Lord Audley’s trial shows that a crime of deviance is worse than a crime against another human being in seventeenth-century England.

The authors talk about the laws and history as shaping the moral views of society, those who are in authority get to dictate what is right from what is wrong. The system is base on what those in power determine is the moral rule.

But in the end, there must exist a separation of the private and public life in society. I concur with Devlin that government not ought to impose full-blown morality, rather it ought to eliminate intolerable morality (Devlin, Lecture number 10). Furthermore, under a theory of a natural law, I believe there exists moral truths that prescribe principled and unwavering standards for morality, and that these standards ought to be made law. As Thomas Aquinas claimed, “an unjust law is no law at all” (Aquinas, Summa Theologica). Hence, government ought to enforce morality based on principles and standards of morality that no logical argument could be made against, such as the immorality of slavery. Not the idea of collective morality derived from the general will that Devlin subscribes too. However, I will admit that not all moral questions are as clear of moral questions as that of slavery, or murder. In such cases, man with his ability to reason is the appropriate authority. For regardless, morality is often a private matter and privacy as Devlin ironically claims ought to be respected. Thus, preserving the separation of the public and private life.

During the Victorian era, women were classified as either being the stay at home mother, or a prostitute. This essay will critically review the statement ‘The regulation of prostitution during the Victorian period – through the contagious disease acts - symbolised a sexual double standard of morality. One that required different standards of chastity for men and women.’ This statement will be reviewed by drawing upon contemporary and historical and sexual double standards. The regulation of prostitution in Britain became a matter of urgency in the middle and later decades of the nineteenth century (Howell, 2000). Moeoever, this essay will also include a description of the Contagious Disease Acts, how it was implemented during the Victorian period, and how it affected the women, and those defined as prostitutes.

Outline and critically evaluate Hart’s account of the relationship between law and morality. Introduction: Natural law theorists believe that all law must be morally justified if it can be legitimised as law at all. Legal positivism means the simple contention that it is in no sense a necessary truth that laws reproduce or satisfy certain demands of morality, though in fact they have otherwise done so. (Hart, DATE)

2. An employee of a specific business doing what they are told so that they will not be scolded and eventually fired.