This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: in and of itself then legal moralism would be a good thing. The cons of such a view would be: It would suppress minority views. Obviously if you do not agree with the collective moral judgment, your minority view would be subject to suppression and possible penalty. The collective moral judgment may not be based on fact. Sometimes societies can devolve into a sort of mass hysteria based on false information or incomplete knowledge. This could be a problem if laws are based on something other than facts. Ultimately, I personally believe that if people just acted more morally there would not be the need for laws to force people into morality. Refrances: Retrieved on September 2, 2010 from: http://www.iep.utm.edu/law-phil/#SSH2a.i...
View Full Document
- Spring '10
- Political Philosophy, legal moralism