This document discusses several topics related to law and morality. It begins by outlining the difference between legal rules, which are enforced through tangible punishment by the government, and moral rules, which are enforced through social punishment and aim for idealism. The document then discusses philosophical ideas around how morality can be seen as relative and how moral views change over time and become codified into law. It provides examples of censorship and abortion law to illustrate these concepts. Finally, it analyzes the "Doctrine of Necessity" using the case of conjoined twins Jodie and Mary and compares it to the Dudley and Stephens case where the defense of necessity was unsuccessful.

1. Law and Morality
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
Law and Morality
Difference between law and morality.
Philosophical ideas about law and
morality.
Censorship.
Abortion Act.
Case of Jodie and Mary.

2. 


Marten Hartwell crashed in a cut off area,
in the early 70s. He was the only survivor.
To stay alive until he get rescued he had
to eat. His only source of food was the
dead body of his companion, a young
nurse.
What should he have done?
become a cannibal (eating death people)
or starved to death?

3. He chose to live.

4. 


Two mountaineers were climbing the Alps, roped
together. One slipped and fell. Unable to move,
he lay dangling at the end of the rope. The other
climber couldn’t lift his companion back up, nor
could he himself move on without cutting the
rope.
What could he have done?
Cut the rope and sent his companion to his
death or stayed where till both died?

5. He cut the rope.

6. 



What would you have done in Hartwell’s
situation?
If you had been the climber in the Alps,
would you have cut the rope?
Which would you put first – Selfpreservation or the maintenance of
another human life?
Do you think the law should have the
answer to these questions?

7. Law and Morality




Moral Rule … set of rules that People in a
certain society used to follow from their
ancestors …
set of beliefs, values, principles and
standards of behavior”.
E.G. Don’t tell Lies, Helping Poor People,
Etc.
Telling Lies Vs. Theft ?

8. Differences
Legal Rule
1)
2)
3)
Punishment .. By an
authorized power (Gov.)
Tangible Punishment
The Purpose .. Aiming
to organize the people
conducts .. And keep the
society safe.
Explicitness .. So Clear
and specified.
Moral Rule
1)
2)
3)
Punishment .. By a
society .. Moral
Punishment (Refusing
Behavior)
The Purpose ... Aiming
for Perfectionism ..so
called (Idealism).
Explicitness.. feelings
toward behaviors.

9. More Differences
4)
5)
6)
7)
Legal Rule
Legal disputes can only
be settled by an
appropriate court of law.
Law is narrower than
morality. It extends to a
great number of action.
Law cannot be changed
into morals.
Formal ..
5)
6)
7)
8)
Moral Rule
Moral disputes can be
solved by the mediation
of elders, wise men, etc.
Morality applies to every
human act.
morals sometimes can
be converted into law …
Charity income tax to
donation.
Informal ..

10. Philosophical ideas about Law
and morality.


It may be argued that morality can be
seen as relative concept.
Meaning that not only different individuals
or groups often have different ideas , but
also that morality changes over time and
that these changes shift in nature and
become a formal regulation through law.

11. Example


In 2006 in Denmark, offensive drawing of
the prophet Muhammad.
The response by many European
politicians was that they considered it as
freedom of speech.

12. Censorship


The Restraining or Prohibiting of speech or other
public communication which may be considered
objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically
incorrect or inconvenient as determined by a
government, media outlet or other controlling
body.
Such as written words, photographs, films,
media outlets Programs, television productions.

13. History


societies experienced many forms of censorship
that the community, as represented by the
government, is responsible for molding/framing
the individual conducts.
Writers, journalists, producers and many others
who argue on the grounds of freedom of
expression and freedom on the part of citizens
to choose whether to read books or view films
and television.

14. 

U.K in 17th century … John Milton argued in
favor of the right to publish, free from
government restraints.
In U.S , the First Amendment of the Constitution
(1787) guarantees Freedom of Speech and
Freedom of press. When a U.S. government
agency tries to prohibit speech or writing, a party
being censored can raise these First
Amendment rights.

15. What is the Rational of
Censorship? Why there are
censorships ….?

16. 1)
2)
Moral censorship removing materials that
are obscene or considered morally
questionable. Pornography, for example, is
often censored under this rationale,
especially child pornography, which is illegal
and censored in most jurisdictions in the world.
Military censorship keeping military intelligence
confidential, and away from the enemy. This is
used to called spying, the process of gathering
military information.

17. 3)
4)
Political censorship take place when
governments restrain information from their
citizens to control the public and prevent free
expression that might increase rebellion.
Corporate censorship occurs when editors in
corporate media outlets intervene to prevent
publishing of information that shows their
business or business partners in a negative
light, or intervene to prevent alternate offers
from reaching public exposure.

18. The Abortion act 1967


n
n

Rex v. Bourne (1939) the principle of aborting an
unborn child to save the life of the mother
established.
It is legal if:
Certified by two doctors, that continuing the
pregnancy would involve risk to the life, or injury
to the pregnant women or her child.
There is a risk that if the child was born, would
suffer serious physical or mental handicap.
If happened after 28 weeks, abortion carried out
would be unlawful. In 1990 it became only
before 24 weeks.

19. Conjoined Twins Case





Jodie and Mary, Twins .
They have their own brain, heart, lungs and
other vital organs, they each have arms and
legs. They are joined at the lower abdomen.
They can be successfully separated.
But the operation would kill the weaker twin.
Mary.
The only way that Mary is alive is the connection
with her sister, Jodie, who is stronger and can
pump blood for both of them.

20. 



Within minutes of separation, Mary will die.
But if the operation does not take place, both will
die within 3-6 weeks.
The parents are not able to make such decision,
they are Roman Catholics and they believe that
they should leave them in God’s hands.
The doctors are convinced that they can
complete the procedure and save Jodie.

21. 

n
n
n

So the hospital wanted a declaration that
the process may be lawfully carried out.
The court granted the declaration on the
ground that:
In Mary's best interest,
It was in Jodie's best interest, and
In any event it would be legal.
It was approved But the parents appealed
(did not agree)

22. 


Section 1 of the children Act 1989 states
that “the child’s welfare shall be the courts
highest thought.”
While it may be in the best interest of
Jodie, what about Mary?
What does Law (Defense) of Necessity/
(doctrine of necessity) mean that Lord
Justice Brooke discussed on Page 4?

23. The Doctrine of necessity



In criminal law … is where the defendant
is arguing that it was necessary for
him/her to commit a crime.
The Doctrine of necessity often operates
where the defendant has two alternatives
either commit a crime OR suffer/cause
another extreme hardship.
For example, prisoner escapes from a
burning prison he may raise it was
necessary for him to escape.

24. Requirements to apply the
Doctrine of Necessity
According to Sir James Stephen, there are
three Requirements :
1.The act is needed to avoid inevitable evil;
2.No more should be done than is
reasonably necessary for the purpose to be
achieved;
3.The evil caused must be equal to the evil
avoided.

25. Finally ….


The doctrine of necessity has been more
successful in medical cases. Such as in
Mary vs. Jodie case
The Doctrine of necessity can only be
pleaded in extreme circumstances and is
often unsuccessful, such as in Dudley &
Stephens case …. What happened ??

26. Dudley & Stephens case





Dudley and Stephens along with Brooks and
Parker alone at sea with no food
Dudley and Stephens proposed one person
sacrifices himself in order to save the rest …
Brooks dissented while Dudley and Stephens
decided to kill Parker since he was the weakest
and youngest :(:(:(
The Three ate parker … :( :( :(
They were rescued After 4 days, Dudley and
Stephens were charged with murder..

27. 


The Issue is “Whether the killing of Parker was
murder considering the circumstances of this
case?”
The necessity of hunger does not justify
murdering weak and young one ..
Killing an innocent life to save one’s own, does
not justify murder even if it under extreme
necessity of hunger.