 
|
|
|
|
|
|
coachmarkos
my boys could swim
|
|
|
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 11387
Location: 1st in AFC West
|
| Back to top
|
|
 Posted: 03/03/04 - 17:49 Post subject:
| Cappy wrote: | | Gogirlgo wrote: | | elkid wrote: | | Cappy wrote: | | The law supercedes ethics in any situation. |
 |
Really? 13th, 14th and 15 Amendments tell it differently. |
The aboltion of slavery
The granting of all persons equal protection and due process .
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude
What am I missing here  |
wondering the same thing, over here.
And the kid is right, if it's an amendment, it's a law.
Reguardless of what kind of life that girl had, it was predicated on a God awful heinous act of crime. I feel horrible for the little girl. But everything she had, wasn't real. And I agree with the it'd be different if it was adoption people...
but c'mon...this is as far removed from adoption as possible. This is not a custody hearing. This was out and out kidnapping...arson...reckless endangerment...and God knows what else. This girl belongs with her birth mother, and the criminal deserves more than we can legally hang on her.
|
|
|
|
|
elkid
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 18 Nov 2002
Posts: 8353
Location: hiding out in Philly
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 17:53 Post subject:
Times change. Situations shift. The Constitution, written during an agrarian period, of course has to be molded and reshaped to fit industrial times. But the truth still is: law takes precedence over ethics, even if the law itself is unethical. The constitution's laws are amended when they are seen as unethical, so the amendments (new laws) negate the original unethical laws. Law therefore ALWAYS takes precedence over ethics.
|
|
|
|
|
coachmarkos
my boys could swim
|
|
|
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 11387
Location: 1st in AFC West
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 17:54 Post subject:
| elkid wrote: | | Times change. Situations shift. The Constitution, written during an agrarian period, of course has to be molded and reshaped to fit industrial times. But the truth still is: law takes precedence over ethics, even if the law itself is unethical. The constitution's laws are amended when they are seen as unethical, so the amendments (new laws) negate the original unethical laws. Law therefore ALWAYS takes precedence over ethics. |
Laws do change, but...they are laws until they are taken out of effect.
ex post facto lawmaking is not allowed.
|
|
|
|
|
Gogirlgo
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 4777
Location: No deal, stalker.
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 17:58 Post subject:
| elkid wrote: | | Times change. Situations shift. The Constitution, written during an agrarian period, of course has to be molded and reshaped to fit industrial times. But the truth still is: law takes precedence over ethics, even if the law itself is unethical. The constitution's laws are amended when they are seen as unethical, so the amendments (new laws) negate the original unethical laws. Law therefore ALWAYS takes precedence over ethics. |
I see what you mean, Kid et al. Sometimes a lack of ethics or something outliving its usefulness winds up changing a law, but you're right, the law has precedence. I read it before as though a law could never be changed, that it was the bottom line, and that's not so.
|
|
|
|
|
elkid
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 18 Nov 2002
Posts: 8353
Location: hiding out in Philly
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 18:01 Post subject:
| coachmarkos wrote: | Laws do change, but...they are laws until they are taken out of effect.
ex post facto lawmaking is not allowed. |
But of course! But constitutional amendments render the old law unconstitutional. No ex post facto anything.
P.S. Ms. Go - you forgot the 19th Amendment as part of your argument, too. Shame, shame. 
|
|
|
|
|
copteacher
Adjunct
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Jun 2002
Posts: 20588
Location: Teaching in the Halls of Justice
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 18:11 Post subject:
I think she should go back with her real mom quickly, but should be supervised and recieve extensive counseling.
It will take a long time.
No ethical delima except that kidnapping is wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
spongebob
Former FFL Champion
|
|
|
Joined: 15 May 2002
Posts: 3602
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 03/03/04 - 21:26 Post subject:
| Cappy wrote: | Its a no brainer lock the kidnapper up forever, return the child to its natural mother. Open and Shut case.
What part of the kidnapping statute is unclear here |
Exactly. There is no ethical debate that I can see.
Just because the kid would have more money or a better lifestyle doesn't mean there is anything to think about.
That would mean that Donald Trump could steal anybody's kid, but that would be OK because he could give them a private jet for their 10th birthday. WTF?
Any problems brought on the kid such as not speaking the language as her mother or having to adjust to a poorer demographic is 100% the fault of the kidnapper. Without that single action, nobody would be in the mess that has been presented. I'm still unclear on what the debate is.
|
|
|
|
|
kristin31
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 15 May 2002
Posts: 8045
Location: Caught in the crossfire of childhood and stardom
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 03/04/04 - 00:15 Post subject:
That's just an aweful situation all around. I feel sorry for that poor child. How confusing it must be. 
|
|
|
|
| |
All times are GMT - 4 Hours
|
|
|
