Law Vs. Morality: A Review Of Criminal Procedures

Law vs. Morality

A Review of Criminal Procedures

Amy Jo Parrish

Troy University of Montgomery

Author Note

This paper was prepared for Criminal Procedure CJ-2241-XTIA 17/T2 taught by Professor Wally Lowery.

Abstract

To say that law and morality goes hand in hand would at first glance swing toward the truthful side. There should not be any distinctions between morality and the law. No difference suggests that a “good” person is one who will do what is lawful. The foundation of our Constitution built itself upon what is right and wrong – morally and lawfully. Before long, discrepancy exposed itself between what is “actually” legal and what “should be” legal. This unevenly parallels to what is lawfully right or morally

Four major principals are establishing standards, maintaining order, resolving disputes, and protecting liberties and rights. It is a model that guides what is acceptable behavior in society today. No toleration of certain behaviors that causes physical injury or damage would come with swift justification. Law also provides consistent order with upholding certain guidelines. The law helps resolve disputes that cannot be resolved through a formal means of alternative dispute resolution. The highest important function of law is to protect each individual from violations and unreasonable intrusions of rights by another individual, organization, or even government.

Morality Defined

Morality is principles that purposely define a distinction between right, wrong, and even bad behavior. “It is a particular system of values and principles of conduct.” (2002) Individuals and even as a society must uphold these values and principles. Morality is the “extent to which an action is right or wrong.” (2002) “Morality chooses to conform to ideals of right human conduct by agreeing the expediency of the law but also questions its morality.” (2006) “Morality today involves a responsible relationship to the laws of the natural world.” (2006)

Relationship of Law and

No distinction should mirror each other. The Supreme Court case Plessy v Ferguson (1896) would beg to differ. The Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendment protects every individual basic human rights. The Supreme Court bypassed these amendments for the word reasoning of “equal but separate theory.” Plessy argued that this theory violated his equal rights by allowing the ruling of segregation. The Supreme Court’s decision failed the constitution as well as our society. It took almost a century to make amends for such an impacted failure. This unjust decision proved that law and morality did not agree to observe what the amendments intended for equality. Our Constitution originated from such discrimination in the first place. Freedom, liberty, human rights, and equality is equal to every individual all across the board. Our nation’s foundation built upon this as our