ASSIGNMENT代写

新西兰代写作业:服从法律

2017-03-31 00:37

认为有绝对的义务服从法律是同时建议,在每一个法律的情况下,道德的理由,遵守这样的法律绝不能超过道德的理由指向违抗。这种立场似乎不尊重个人自主的概念。梅嫩德斯[ 4 ]写道,“如果我们认为它提供了一个绝对的理由,我们就不能再把它作为我们的实践理性的运动的一部分,但作为一种替代它。”另一方面,如果我们认为存在的唯一的任务就是“看下一个,即一个任务可以说直到它是反驳法的道德评价内容的存在,我们在本质上是表明法律只会强加义务在我们作为个人能够同意在法律背后的道德问题。这样的立场似乎很少考虑到一个法律制度的需要,一般服从,以便它成功地履行其角色的冲突解决和社会协调。在拉兹[ 5 ]写道:“法律规范的理由,而不是仅仅的表述,有理由。”问题的责任的实际特点必须介于这两个位置之间;法律必须尊重个体的推理过程,但同时必须实施义务在它的公民,至少在某种程度上,该系统能够保持社会秩序和管理社会冲突。正如我们稍后将在这篇文章中观察到,不同的法学家有自己的意见,平衡应该被认为是谎言,虽然我们也会看到,这个位置往往更接近一个初步的责任,而不是绝对义务的概念。
新西兰代写作业:服从法律
To argue that there is an absolute duty to obey the law is to simultaneously suggest that in the case of every law, the moral reasons for obeying such law could never be outweighed by moral reasons pointing to disobedience. Such a position seems to pay no regard to notions of individual autonomy. As Menendez[4] writes, “if we consider it as providing an absolute reason, then we cannot any longer see it as part and parcel of the exercise of our practical reason, but as an alternative to it.”On the other hand, if we are to argue that the only duty that exists is a prima facie one, i.e. that a duty can be said to exist until it is rebutted by an assessment of the moral content of the law, then we are in essence suggesting that the law will only impose an obligation upon us where we as individuals are able to agree with the morality underlying the law in question. Such a position seems to pay little regard to the need of a legal system to be generally obeyed in order for it to successfully perform its roles of conflict solving and social co-ordination. As Raz[5] writes: “legal norms are reasons for acting, and not merely statements to the effect that there are reasons for acting.”The actual characteristics of the duty in question must lie somewhere between these two positions; the law must respect the processes of individual reasoning, but at the same time must impose obligations upon its citizens, at least to the extent that the system is able to retain social order and manage social conflict. As we shall observe later in this essay, different jurists have their own opinions of where the balance should be perceived to lie, although as we shall also see, this position tends to be nearer a notion of a prima facie duty, than that of an absolute duty.