(June 17, 2016 at 2:33 pm)Veritas_Vincit Wrote:(June 17, 2016 at 1:49 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: I personally wouldn't interfere with the Roman justice system. Right or wrong, Jesus was duly prosecuted and thus his fate was morally justified. Before I'm attacked with a host of Godwins, I'm not sure I would interfere wit the Nazis at a personal level. It would depend on what my morals at that specific time were. There were those who opposed the Nazis and those who supported them. Just as today there are those who oppose the right to abortion and those who support it. In general, my morals align with coming down on the side of law and order regardless of individual outcomes.
From reading your post, it seems to me that when you say your morals align with law and order regardless of individual outcomes, that this is an a-moral position. What you're actually saying is that you hold the rule of law and order higher than the moral dynamics of any particular situation. You are granting the moral high ground to those who set and uphold the law regardless of the particular laws they set or how they enforce them. What if the law is immoral? What if the way it is being enforced is immoral?
Asked and answered. I prefer the rule of law, but I admit it's possible that I might perceive the law to be so corrupt that it needs to be overthrown. In that case I would work to overthrow the system. Whether disobedience to the established order would be a part of that effort would depend on context. As long as there are peaceful means of working to ensure that right is done, I would defer to those.