...The question to be confronted is whether empiricism, the philosophical materialism of Durkheim and Comte and their successors, can support biblical morality and the law we have known. Social conscience takes a hundred-degree turn when empiricism is affirmed and the metaphysical is denied. Under such a construction there are no rights anterior to law and no rights contrary to law.
The implications for tort and contract law are enormous. Attribution of blame is attributed without causal evidence. One generation is held accountable for the deeds of another. Retribution it is called. Changing attitudes among legal theorists and decades of judicial activism have not only made tort litigation a risky business for industry, but have altered the traditional role of law in society and have obfuscated the purpose of law in general...
That 'current debate' has to do not only with 'personhood,' but with the disruption of natural law by positive law. One example is the Queer Marriage positive law, which defies the natural law observed throughout history. Another is the blessing given to abortion.
We will soon be looking at a Positive Law abrogation of the Second Amendment, which recognizes a right anterior to law, and currently are embroiled in attempts to enshrine Positive Law babblings holding currently-living Americans responsible (read: near-culpable) for slavery.
So maybe defining "The Person" is going to be important, eh?
No comments:
Post a Comment