The Law of the Land vs. Moral Convictions Laws are put in place by the people for the people. So, going against the laws of the land is seen as unethical and simply not right. But when a person’s moral convictions cloud their minds, it could only lead to destruction of the balance put in place by laws. Morals are important, but not when they put the public in danger and disregard the fact that their decisions impact other people, especially when the law is set to benefit the greater good. Opening the public to the risk of endangerment is only one example of what following moral convictions can do. According to The Washington Post, Bradley Manning had released very sensitive and classified information online, putting our country in danger,
…show more content…
A woman in Kentucky, Kim Davis, refuses to sign marriage licenses to gay couples as same-sex marriage is against her religious beliefs. Even though same-sex marriage is now legal, Davis still refuses as reported by CNN, and Ohio governor John Kasich has this to say: “I respect that fact that this lady doesn’t agree… But in terms of her responsibility I think she has to comply”(CNN). John Kasich brings up a good argument that Davis has to follow the law due to her responsibilities to her job even if they go against her morals since signing off marriage licenses is what she signed up for. Although in the old play of Antigone is purely fictional, it brings a similar situation to light. Creon, King of Thebes, is faced with a decision identical to Kim Davis’. He either chooses to follow the law or put his morals first and risk his reputation as ruler, “How, if I tolerate a traitor at home, shall I rule those abroad?”(Sophocles). Sophocles puts Creon between a rock and a hard place during this moment in Antigone, After his son, Haemon, gives him a different view on the issue of burying Polynices and freeing Antigone, Creon stands his ground but is then swayed to follow his morals. Together these two situations are nearly mirror-images of each other. In each situation, a person has to choose between their morals or the law while their jobs and reputations are at …show more content…
Referring back to CNN, Kim Davis is awaiting her sentence from the court as she refuses to go against her religion and sign marriage licenses to homosexual couples, “‘If she interferes with her deputies’, federal Judge David Bunning said, ‘she could be jailed for defying the court’”(CNN). Following Kim Davis’ case, the CEO of a pharmaceutical company decided to reprice a life-saving drug[Daraphim] from $13.50 per pill to $750 overnight, “‘...the price of the drug, which costs roughly $1 to produce was increased to $750 per tablet... he [Shkreli] hiked up the price of the pill because Tuning Pharmaceuticals needed to turn a profit on the drug’”(Daily Mail). As people who go after their morals become ‘happier and prouder’ with their choice, they don’t realize the outcome doesn’t just affect them but others as well. For example, Shkreli didn’t think of the people who can already barely afford the drug they need to survive when he decided to reprice it overnight. He was only thinking of how his company needed more profit as self gain while people are now struggling to support themselves while trying to get a hold of their very much needed medication. As for Kim Davis, she is impacting the lives of couples who dreamt of finally being officially recognized as a married couple by not giving
A woman in Kentucky, Kim Davis, refuses to sign marriage licenses to gay couples as same-sex marriage is against her religious beliefs. Even though same-sex marriage is now legal, Davis still refuses as reported by CNN, and Ohio governor John Kasich has this to say: “I respect that fact that this lady doesn’t agree… But in terms of her responsibility I think she has to comply”(CNN). John Kasich brings up a good argument that Davis has to follow the law due to her responsibilities to her job even if they go against her morals since signing off marriage licenses is what she signed up for. Although in the old play of Antigone is purely fictional, it brings a similar situation to light. Creon, King of Thebes, is faced with a decision identical to Kim Davis’. He either chooses to follow the law or put his morals first and risk his reputation as ruler, “How, if I tolerate a traitor at home, shall I rule those abroad?”(Sophocles). Sophocles puts Creon between a rock and a hard place during this moment in Antigone, After his son, Haemon, gives him a different view on the issue of burying Polynices and freeing Antigone, Creon stands his ground but is then swayed to follow his morals. Together these two situations are nearly mirror-images of each other. In each situation, a person has to choose between their morals or the law while their jobs and reputations are at …show more content…
Referring back to CNN, Kim Davis is awaiting her sentence from the court as she refuses to go against her religion and sign marriage licenses to homosexual couples, “‘If she interferes with her deputies’, federal Judge David Bunning said, ‘she could be jailed for defying the court’”(CNN). Following Kim Davis’ case, the CEO of a pharmaceutical company decided to reprice a life-saving drug[Daraphim] from $13.50 per pill to $750 overnight, “‘...the price of the drug, which costs roughly $1 to produce was increased to $750 per tablet... he [Shkreli] hiked up the price of the pill because Tuning Pharmaceuticals needed to turn a profit on the drug’”(Daily Mail). As people who go after their morals become ‘happier and prouder’ with their choice, they don’t realize the outcome doesn’t just affect them but others as well. For example, Shkreli didn’t think of the people who can already barely afford the drug they need to survive when he decided to reprice it overnight. He was only thinking of how his company needed more profit as self gain while people are now struggling to support themselves while trying to get a hold of their very much needed medication. As for Kim Davis, she is impacting the lives of couples who dreamt of finally being officially recognized as a married couple by not giving