• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Discuss the nature of legal and moral rules , and consider whether the law does and should reflect moral rules

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Discuss the nature of legal and moral rules. Consider whether the law does and should reflect moral rules. ( AQA A2 UNIT 6 - LAW AND MORALS ) A rule was defined by Twining and Miers as a general norm mandating conduct. For a legal rule, the breaking of rules will result in a punishment, such as a fine, prison or a criminal record. Legal rules are there to keep society in order. Moral rules, however, are sometimes not deliberately made, and are within the individual due to beliefs they have, or due to the fact they would feel guilty if they participated in the breaking of the rule. Sometimes moral rules come from religion. For example, Muslims can only eat meat if it Halal meat. Therefore, Muslim children will grow up with the idea that it is wrong to eat any other meat. Moral rules, if broken, have no punishment apart from the person's guilt. ...read more.

Middle

One example is the diversity of opinions on abortion. The Abortion Act 1967 made it legal for women to abort their unborn babies. Although it may be legal, many people disagree with abortion; this is therefore an example of when law conflicts with morals, as it is only upholding some of the countries morals. An example where most of the nation would agree to the law due to their own morals are the offences set down in the offences against the person's act 1861, and the laws on murder. However, the law doesn't reflect morals in some cases. One example is adultery. The Ten Commandments rule that adultery should not be committed, and most people would agree, but there is no law in the UK against committing adultery anymore. Another way in which law reflects morals is the law on euthanasia. A lot of people believe euthanasia is wrong, as everyone has a right to live. ...read more.

Conclusion

However, in R v Brown, some homosexual sadomasochists caused injury to each other's genitals, but all had consented to this injury. This wasn't held to be acceptable, as the law on assault had been breached. Devlin would agree with this decision, as he stated that judges should still preserve common morality. Others in society would not have agreed with the actions in the case of Brown, which shows Devlins argument. From this discussion we can see that there is a diversity of morals through the UK, and the law reflects some of these morals, for example the moral of not killing is reflected with murder; but not others, for example , adultery and abortion are not crimes, but most people would see these as wrong. We can also see that there are two sides to the argument of whether law should reflect morality or whether it should be a separate thing, AND Professor Hart and Professor Devlin both have valid points. Different individuals will agree with different points of view. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Machinery of Justice section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Machinery of Justice essays

  1. Law and Morality. Within the justice system there is a genuine relationship between law ...

    Moreover, the Wolfenden Committee had used Mill's liberal view when looking at the laws surrounding prostitution and homosexuality. He believed that the laws on prostitution and homosexuality should be more liberal and he argued that they should not constitute as crimes.

  2. Discuss the meaning of 'justice'. Consider the extent to which justice is achieved in ...

    To each according to his merits - people get what they deserve. To each according to his rank - people may enjoy privileges according to status. To each according to hs legal entitlement - people receive what the law says they should.

  1. Free essay

    Examine the relationship between law and morals. Consider the extent to which the law ...

    the Bible, the Torah and the Quran. Morals, unlike the law, are voluntary beliefs on how people 'ought' to behave and what individuals think is 'right' and 'wrong' behaviour. Although there is no punishment for not accepting these beliefs, there may be an informal type of enforcement by which people

  2. Law and Morals

    Moreover, this can explain why in the case of Gillick 1986, a mother was unable to prevent her teenage daughter from receiving private medical advice and treatment concerning sexual matters and contraception, as she thought this was encouraging under age sex which she believed to be morally wrong due to her religious beliefs.

  1. A rule as to precedent (which any court lays down for itself) is not ...

    The law was clear, and the answer was negative. Nevertheless, even in these instances, the courts are also not fettered in their discretion. The exceptions to the rules regulating that they should follow decisions of their own and court above ar so wide ranging, that there is no way they can be hoist by their own petard.

  2. Conditional Fee Arrangements and Legal Aid

    They suggest that solicitors will only want to take on cases where there is a very high chance of winning. It was for this reason that medical negligence cases have been kept within the state-funded system. There is also the risk that where legal aid is refused, a subsequent trial

  1. English legal system

    They submitted that the grounds had been fully met via the conduct of the respondents and their associates and so in the interests of the public, SHAT would be better served re-letting the property. The appellants then brought forth the argument that an appeal judge could only interfere on a point of law in such a case as this.

  2. Arguing in Favour of the Death Penalty

    Tax payers pay out millions of dollars for the prisoners legal fees and these prisoners are allowed to let their cases drag out for years. Pro death penalty supporters call for reform so that it can be carried out ?fairly, justly and in a timely manner.? (Bailey)

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work