ANGLO NATURAL COMMON LAW VS EVERYONE ELSE – (ESPECIALLLY YOU KNOW WHO –“Among c

ANGLO NATURAL COMMON LAW VS EVERYONE ELSE – (ESPECIALLLY YOU KNOW WHO

–“Among contemporary common-law legal practitioners and Anglophone legal philosophers, “natural law” often simply refers to any approach that treats law as necessarily having a connection to morality.
This meaning is essentially the converse of “legal positivism,” which is often defined, minimally, as the contention that law has no necessary connection with morality.”–

So there exist those of us who hold to the rule that if it is not moral it is not law as we may not be bound to that which is not moral. And there exist those of us who hold that morality does not exist, or is not relevant to the law, and as such law is whatever they say it is. WHne in practice they mean only that a law must be produced by some pretense of legitimacy, not that it must be moral.

This is of course, because they have no means of judging what is moral -for reasons I’ve explained exhaustively elsewhere.

The purpose of my work, is, in part, to produce a science of morality so that we can render attempts at positive law illegal even to propose.

Cheers
CD

PS: In my world it’s smart and moral people vs dim and immoral peole but, hey…. 😉