This document discusses the relationship between law, morality, and religion. It notes that while religion guides societal morals, law is not based on morality or religion alone. There are some differences in the sanctions of each - law uses coercion, religion uses fear of hell, and morality uses social disapproval. Additionally, what is legal is not always moral, as morality can vary between societies and over time, while an immoral law remains legally valid. The document questions whether law can enforce morals in society and how "public morality" should be defined for a diverse place like Nigeria.
This document discusses the relationship between law, morality, and religion. It notes that while religion guides societal morals, law is not based on morality or religion alone. There are some differences in the sanctions of each - law uses coercion, religion uses fear of hell, and morality uses social disapproval. Additionally, what is legal is not always moral, as morality can vary between societies and over time, while an immoral law remains legally valid. The document questions whether law can enforce morals in society and how "public morality" should be defined for a diverse place like Nigeria.
This document discusses the relationship between law, morality, and religion. It notes that while religion guides societal morals, law is not based on morality or religion alone. There are some differences in the sanctions of each - law uses coercion, religion uses fear of hell, and morality uses social disapproval. Additionally, what is legal is not always moral, as morality can vary between societies and over time, while an immoral law remains legally valid. The document questions whether law can enforce morals in society and how "public morality" should be defined for a diverse place like Nigeria.
This document discusses the relationship between law, morality, and religion. It notes that while religion guides societal morals, law is not based on morality or religion alone. There are some differences in the sanctions of each - law uses coercion, religion uses fear of hell, and morality uses social disapproval. Additionally, what is legal is not always moral, as morality can vary between societies and over time, while an immoral law remains legally valid. The document questions whether law can enforce morals in society and how "public morality" should be defined for a diverse place like Nigeria.
BY R.G. OKPLOGIDI ESQ. rokplogidi@bsum.edu.ng Is there any distinction between Law, Morality and Religion? Religion is said to be the most important institution which guides the morals of a given society thereby preaching at every given time what is good or bad. It directly influences the inner spiritual being of the people and Karl Marx has aptly described it as the opium of the people. Religion and morality assert that doing a thing is bad without proffering any reasons for its being bad. On the other hand, law is not premised on moral adulation nor any religious injunction. It is an authority as well as a command which according to the Positivists, should be obeyed, just or unjust. Is there any distinction between Law, Morality and Religion? The dividing line between these concepts has remain and may continue to remain elusive. Every society has its own relative set of rules and regulations binding on its peoples; so are found within any society some basic moral values. For instance, customary law is blended by morality of the people coupled with the belief of God while the ancient people believed in the existence of many gods. Thus the tripartite system of law, morality and religion are found present in customary law. Is there any distinction between Law, Morality and Religion? Another distinction is in the area of sanction. Law, morality and religion have sanctions but the quality of sanction takes the form of force or coercion; in religion the sanction is fear of suffering in hell while in morality, the sanction takes the form of reprobation, repulsion and ostracism. Immoral act may by virtue of time, space and circumstances become legal due to changes in the premium placed on public morality. In the same vein, an immoral law can be factually invalidated while still remaining legally valid. Is there any distinction between Law, Morality and Religion? Furthermore, whereas law is universal in outlook, morality is sectionally and internationally relative. An immoral law in one society may not be viewed as such in another society. For instance, Mohammed v. Knott (supra) it was held that a 13 year old Northern Nigerian girl was lawfully married to her adult husband resident in England under the Moslem law. This practice was no doubt manifestly below the moral standard prevailing in the English society. The pertinent question that readily comes to mind is whether law can be used to enforce morals in the society. Another issue is that of “public morality” within the context of a given society. As for the latter, there is no doubt that the yardstick for determining what is public morality is relative especially in an heterogenous and complex society like Nigeria. Which criterion is to be applied? Is there any distinction between Law, Morality and Religion? Is it religion, denomination, tribal, ethnicity, class or status within the set up? This was the issue before their Lordships in Shaw v. D.P.P. Shaw published a booklet titled the “Ladies Directory” consisting of names and contact addresses of prostitutes. It was meant to assist them in the practice of their trade. The listed prostitutes paid for the advertisements and Shaw made profit from the said publication. Shaw was subsequently charged with conspiracy to corrupt public morals. The House of Lords held that conspiracy to corrupt public morals was a common law misdemeanor. In the opinion of Lord Simonds: In the sphere of criminal law, I entertain no doubt that there remains in the courts of law a residual power to enforce the supreme and fundamental purpose of the law, to conserve not only the safety and order but also the moral welfare of the State.