[Foundation-l] Let's switch to CC-BY-SA

Wed Sep 12 17:36:45 UTC 2007

Thomas Dalton wrote:
> On 12/09/2007, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>   
>> Thomas Dalton wrote
>>> Of course, morality is an entirely subjective concept. At the time,
>>> slavery was generally considered moral, since the people being
>>> enslaved were considered lesser beings. It was when those morals
>>> changed that people started to call for abolition. The law generally
>>> follows morals, but lags behind a little. During the gap between
>>> morals changing and the law catching up you can have immoral laws.
>>>       
>> The law doesn't necessarily follow morality; it often reflects the
>> self-interest of those in power.
>>     
> Well, yes, I forgot to mention I was talking about in a Democracy.
> Generally, laws in a Democracy do follow morals - sometimes it
> requires waiting for the next election before the laws are updated,
> but it does happen eventually (assuming it's sufficiently important to
> people).
One mustn't allow "Democracy" to lure one into a false sense of security. 

People in power are resilient and can adapt to changing times -- much 
more so than the lumpen electorate.  What goes on at the upper political 
levels tends to be beyond the grasp and imagination of most voters who 
are morally guided by an assumption of good faith.  Lobbyists and their 
ilk like to maintain good relations with both sides of the political 
fence, knowing that their favourites will not always remain in power. 

To adapt the words of a famous Canadian third-party politician, T. C. 
Douglas:  When all the candidates are either blue cats or red cats, who 
are the mice going to vote for?

Ec