This conversation is closed.

Legal/Process needs to be aligned with Ethics

In my experience legal procedures and many business activities have yet to aspire to the level of Ethics. In this day and age, everyone knows to speak to ethics, but is it really practiced by government, business, etc...? For example: What happens when acting ethically is not aligned legally? If you act with integrity but, do so "at legal liability" what is the lesson? It sends a message of act legally and in line with process even if it means compromising ethics. Acting/Doing something the right way (acting ethically) is not always the legal way. Why does this exist as a conflict? Do we compromise integrity to follow rules & laws that lack authenticity in spirit? There needs to be a cultural bridge construct to align these presently diverse concepts on the same plane.
Open to your strategies on how to address and improve.

  • thumb

    Gail .

    • +2
    Mar 2 2013: It is impossible to be a part of American culture without violating ethics. It is impossible to participate in the global fiscal scam without violating ethics. it is impossible to hold most jobs without violating ethics. If laws were designed to produce ethical behavior, our entire global economy would collapse, and most governments with them. If laws promoted ethics, there would not be such a vast disparity of wealth. If laws promoted ethics, we would not be raping our earth, destroying our habitat, and threatening the survival of much of life on earth - including humanity.

    how to bridge the divide? Make a distinction between ethics and morality. Morality is something that is "taught" - be it by religious leaders or secular societies who pass laws with specific intents. But ethics is something very different. Morals do not need to be ethical, rational or reasonable.

    If I were Pharaoh of the world (a concept that could be legal while not being ethical), I would so change the educational paradigm that school would not be unrecognizable by comparison. I would elevate the student by teaching EQ. I would stop focusing so heavily on IQ. It would teach critical thinking skills (how to solve problems) and in this way inspire creativity. Parents would start learning better life-strategies from their children. Eventually, I would be de-throned because there is already enough untaught information discovered through science that it would dramatically change the world if people were willing to dare consider its implications.

    But it wold probably be easier just to let our unsustainable fiscal system (and Abrahamic religions) collapse sooner rather than later, forcing individuals to think for themselves, because when money has no value, neither do the governments and religions that are sustained by it. Then we have a chance.

    those who want to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization want what never was & never will be (thomas Jefferson)
  • thumb
    Mar 2 2013: My Navy pal's dad was a prominent Oklahoma lawyer. He told his son to stay out of the Law profession if he was driven by Ethics rather than by the Law. Up until I heard that I thought they were one and the same. A law can be unethical?. . . yup, many are. Growing up sucks!
  • thumb
    Mar 1 2013: It is more about acquiring other peoples money and has nothing to do with justice.

    If it were up to me...

    Small claims court works very well. Why because a judge decides the outcome and moves through a lot of cases quickly. I would simply copy the paradigm to as high a court level as is practical. Which would be higher than you might think. You have to admit that a jury trial is more likely to unjust than a judge trial, OJ Simpson trial for instance...
  • Mar 1 2013: "Is the law still the law if it stops protecting people and starts hurting them?"
    I ask myself this question frequently.
    For myself I think the law should be interpreted in the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law. this is a common mistake that is made by a great deal of people.

    As for a chance to a more ethically 'correct' law, so to speak, one should wonder on what then should be considered the 'correct' ethic code. What you see as ethically correct is not necessarily what I find ethically correct.
    The next question is what would happen if such a law came into existence? The law, unlike we sometimes seem to think, is an everchanging and adapting concept. It needs to be if it wants to keep up with society. The same goes for ethics, it is something evolving not statically. How do you keep those alligned? One moves faster than the other.

    In truth, I believe that ethics are personal and the law is general. An ethical law will always be the ethics of a few imposed on many.
    But you are right; the law can sometimes get in the way of 'justice' or ethically correct behavior (as perceived by society). In such a case, it is for those involved in the specific situation to deal with it.

    You know who came to mind when I while writing this answer? Thomas More...
  • Mar 1 2013: Aren't there enough ethics rules anyway? In Texas we have people that lawyers can call to see if we are in compliance with the rules. I was doing pro bono wirk tonight. A program where people can call the local bar association to get free legal advice. Why do they try to mislead us, and why are they unhappy when they get answers other than what they want? Maybe Dr. House had it right on tv "people lie." How do you help magical thinkers? Is it true that the old throne room of King Solomon was discovered recently? Is it true that many baby haves were discovered? Okay that was just kidding around Only to protect her own child did one woman tell the truth. What does that tell us? How can one easily deal with disagreements among people. Easily and cheaply. Pat - I haven't heard a person complain about a JP since tonight, However, I am inclined to agree on routine matters, and one can have a jury there too.