Nobody asked but …
Here are some of my Facebook responses to a person who seemed to want man-made legislation, which he incorrectly calls “law”.
- The choice to do an evil happens at a concrete place while the formulation of a law is an abstraction, and the combination has at least two faults, 1) the choice to do evil precedes consideration of law (law is nearly always after the fact and irrelevent to the crime except for punishment), and 2) man-made law, fiction, is imperfect and inefficient and has unlimited unforeseen consequences.
- Do I think that legislation that reinforces natural law should be repealed? Or should we repeal laws gone awry? Sure, on the latter, but not on effectively written cases of the former. But that has nothing to do with tolerance for the crime. If you are against a certain legislation that does not mean that you may not point out a natural law which accomplishes the same end without unanticipated consequences.
- There are no natural laws that permit murder. Legislation (fictional law) cannot prevent murder, but it is often cited or corrupted to permit murder.
- If I would repeal law, how will we know evil if there are not laws [legislation] to define evil? Who said we are without law? Only fictional law can be repealed. Natural law preexists a society of humans.
- How do we know what natural law consists of unless it’s codified? We have a great deal of difficulty with that idea with or without codification. And so much of the codification is based on false premises. There really is no direct connection between law, natural or artificial, and the existence of good or the absence of good.
- I much prefer Ludwig von Mises’ aproach to good. The choice that lessens unease without transferring it to another, as well as the converse, is a good. Furthermore, I believe that codification is a dewdrop, while principle is all the seven seas.
- The management of one’s own actions in the face of good or evil is, by natural form, a dynamic problem. It is not, as statists would insist, a game of pin the tail on the donkey.
- Study the Irish rebellion and its background a bit closer if you get hung up on a conflation between good and codification. The Brits kept changing the rules to preserve oppression.
- If good can only exist through fiction, then it doesn’t exist at all. I reject the premise.
- If it sounds like I’m embracing Mises’ codified definition of good, then yes, embracing voluntarily. It’s not a codification made compulsory by a mandatory collective.