Quote Originally Posted by jocko_nc
Such complaints can be absolutely absurd, yet a court likely would allow them to procede. Personally, I think there needs to be more of a filter or some sort of gatekeeper to keep the absurd out. However, that is our system.
Don't worry Jocko. There is a gatekeeper in place. I think a more accurate name in today's society would be called a Judge, and the filter could also be known as a jury. And they are solely responsible for what is absurd and what is not. Whether you agree with them or not is totally your choice

Quote Originally Posted by jocko_nc
Just because something is technicaly legal does not mean it is right.
That could be correct for anyone.For example...
What do you think of praying in school?
What do you think of Capital Punishment?
What about Abortion?
What about War?
Churches not paying taxes?
Government loans for Casinos?

When something is "technically legal" IT IS RIGHT. It is right for our society and can not be punishable, if a dispute comes from uncertainties then they go see the gatekeeper.

Now if your definition of right is more "to the right" as it seems, then you are arguing that it is not morally correct for you to follow the laws set by our government. Having morals is fine but watch out for when "Right" crosses into the realm of "LEGAL" Morals usually lose.

Quote Originally Posted by jocko_nc
If I find your wallet on the sidewalk, it is perfectly legal for me to keep it. I can take the cash out of it. I can call you up and hold it for ransom. Does that make it right? I can shoot your dog in front of your nose if it strays onto my property. Does that make it right? If society at large starts operating on the fringes of what is legal, civilization is doomed. That is a fact. Fortunately, the vast majority of Americans, and people in general, are inherently good and tend to do what is right. That fact, not law, is what makes our society work. Please do not so quick to justify someone's actions merely because they are legal.

jocko
Just a reminder. It is illegal to hold things ransom and shoot dogs for a first offense of trespassing (unless they are attacking). However, you are allowed to not like the law, and myself for "justifying someone's actions merely because they are legal"

I feel like we're both on the left side of the scale Jocko. It just seems that you are a little too extreme for me. I believe that a society could work on just morals just fine. That is, until this fictional society's population surpasses three. Then we'll have to set morals aside and be governed by a certain amount of laws. Whether those laws agree totally with your morals completely or not. The thing to remember is that a person's morals could vary, and do, from person to person. It's finding that common ground that allows us to survive.

Joshua