With close reference to the cases of Shaw v DPP and Knuller v DPP , Show how the law relates to morals and religion.

by amancav (student)

What is the relation of law to morality? Law’s relation to morality has been debated ever since jurisprudence itself came to be and it seems as though it is destined to remain as one of the great philosophical debates. They are mutually engaged along a course that winds through a political society’s life. Laws are generally based on the moral principles of society. Both regulate the conduct of the individual in society. They influence each other to a great extent. Laws, to be effective, must represent the moral ideas of the people. But good laws sometimes serve to rouse the moral conscience of the people and create and maintain such conditions as may encourage the growth of morality.

However, it is said that not because something is immoral that makes it illegal, example: pre-marital sex, neglecting your family and adultery are just a few. Sometimes morality can influence the law in the sense that it can provide the reason for making whole groups of immoral actions illegal. With regards to this, in the case of Shaw v DPP (1962), Lord Diplock said “Shaw’s act of publishing advertisements for prostitutes soliciting fornication tended to corrupt public morals. Therefore Shaw’s agreement to do that act was a crime at common law”. The Court of Appeal upheld a conviction against Shaw on the charge of “conspiracy to corrupt public morals”. Similarly, in the case Knuller v DPP (1972) , the House of Lords held that while the offence of “conspiracy to outrage public decency” was unknown to the law, the Appellants by their actions were nevertheless guilty of behaviour that could be deemed an offence known to English law, that is, “conspiracy to corrupt public morals”. In these cases, it can be seen that the English and hence the Commonwealth Caribbean morality is founded upon Christian belief.

It follows that there are a few distinctions between law and morality. Firstly, laws regulate external human conduct whereas morality mainly regulates internal conduct. Secondly, laws are universal; morality is variable. Thirdly, laws are definite and precise while morality is variable. Fourthly, laws are upheld by the coercive power of the state; morality simply enjoys the support of public opinion or individual conscience. Fifthly, laws are studied under Jurisprudence while morality is studied under Ethics.

How really is law and religion connected? The religion of the European colonizers was and still continues to be Christianity, which is said to have ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

How really is law and religion connected? The religion of the European colonizers was and still continues to be Christianity, which is said to have influenced the English law. This religious influence was so strong that religious rules were given statutory force and validity. For example, the religious rules “thou shalt not steal” and “thou shalt not kill” have been made law.

Although law and religion are often said to be separate, it is important for the government to discuss the relationship between the two. In order for separation to be set in place between law and religion, the government has to sit down and devise these formulas that are going to promote the separation. In the government’s discussion about laws and religion, it is important that whatever new laws that are composed in regards to law and religion still hold true to giving people the religious freedom that they want. The separation between laws and religion is about making sure that the people are content with the decisions that they make. They want to come to fair conclusions when it comes to the laws and religion. Although no matter what the government decides to do between law and religion, everyone is not going to be happy, the aim is often to make sure that the people are happy. Even if they may not be directly happy with the government’s final decision when they are discussing a matter of law and religion, many are at least happy with the idea of knowing that the law and religion discussion was done to work things out to the best of their interest in terms of religious freedom.

Firstly, the first Amendment is one of the most important documentation that relates to laws and religion. This is one of the first times that laws and religion were clearly defined on this level. Although everyone may not be completely familiar with every federal law and religion sanction, they are certainly aware of the laws and religion sanctions that are found in the First Amendment. This was one of the first times when law and religion were declared as separate entities, officially giving people the right to their freedom of religion.

Secondly, The Supreme Court has gone on to pass further sanctions in regards to laws and religion throughout the years. Lastly, in the government’s discussion about law and religion, something that is at the heart of the discussion is what is acceptable in terms of religious displays in public places. This goes from anywhere to the law and religion discussions as to what monuments with a religious connotation are permitted, and what religious symbols one can wear in their daily lives. As the religious discussions continue to unravel, it is all in an effort to strengthen the relationship between laws and religion.

In conclusion, for Lord Denning, the most influential and renowned judge of modern times, the relationship between ‘religion’, ‘morality’ and ‘law’ was clear. He once commented that, “Without religion, no morality; without morality, no law. ‘Religion’ and ‘morality’ were entwined as were ‘morality’ and ‘law’.

Morality and law are not the same although of course they overlap. Law might be

thought of as a public codification of morality for a culture, although certain laws

in that system, or even the system itself, might be deemed immoral, example,

Apartheid. Law is not a necessary attribute of morality although morality may be

thought to be a necessary attribute of law.

Teacher Reviews

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

Edward Smith

5th of Jul 2013

Starts off well, particularly the second paragraph. But then quickly loses pace. Other issues that might have been addressed include: the principles of Natural Law Theory, Positivism (an example is provided in this essay - do not kill) and Legal Realism; euthanasia-type issues; the cases of Brown, Wilson and Donovan etc. Overall, this essay suffers from a lack of structure and argument.

Did you find this review helpful? Join our team of reviewers and help other students learn