Civil law seems unreasonable

[JJ1989]

Hi again,

Just a question on civil law: Is it justifiable to break a civil law when your reasoning doesnt agree?
In my situation I live in an Australian state where it is obligatory to notify the police when you know of a serious crime being committed (unless you have a reasonable excuse).
This law actually seems helpful in cases such as rape, murder etc but I think its unreasonable to be forced to turn in people you know on other cases such as fraud. The reaoson why I think it is unreasonable is because it seems to interrupt our private associations with our family/friends
and I don’t think its right to force us to do the policing job (even though i dont support nor condone criminal activity).

Would anyone agree that this law can be morally broken?

 

[markomalley]

Hi again,

Just a question on civil law: Is it justifiable to break a civil law when your reasoning doesnt agree?
In my situation I live in an Australian state where it is obligatory to notify the police when you know of a serious crime being committed (unless you have a reasonable excuse).
This law actually seems helpful in cases such as rape, murder etc but I think its unreasonable to be forced to turn in people you know on other cases such as fraud. The reaoson why I think it is unreasonable is because it seems to interrupt our private associations with our family/friends
and I don’t think its right to force us to do the policing job (even though i dont support nor condone criminal activity).

Would anyone agree that this law can be morally broken?

2242 The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s."48 “We must obey God rather than men”:49

When citizens are under the oppression of a public authority which oversteps its competence, they should still not refuse to give or to do what is objectively demanded of them by the common good; but it is legitimate for them to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens against the abuse of this authority within the limits of the natural law and the Law of the Gospel.502243 Armed resistance to oppression by political authority is not legitimate, unless all the following conditions are met: 1) there is certain, grave, and prolonged violation of fundamental rights; 2) all other means of redress have been exhausted; 3) such resistance will not provoke worse disorders; 4) there is well-founded hope of success; and 5) it is impossible reasonably to foresee any better solution.​

This is not as clear as a law that mandates support for abortion or euthanasia. But I could see how this could be requiring you to fall into the sin of detraction or the sin of rash judgment. I could also see how such a law could be seen to be offensive to the idea of solidarity between neighbors (if you are required to support reporting suspicions rather than being required to report such a thing when you have a moral certitude).

The fundamental issue I would have with this type of law is that it is mandating good behavior rather than prohibiting bad behavior. That kind of thing usually doesn’t end well.

To add, though, your reasoning is not a rationale to disobey a law. The rationale would have to be if obeying the civil law would force you to violate the moral law.

 

[JJ1989]

2242

The fundamental issue I would have with this type of law is that it is mandating good behavior rather than prohibiting bad behavior. That kind of thing usually doesn’t end well.

QUOTE]

I agree. Even though it can bring good outcomes I can still foresee negative consequences. I dont believe its fair in that it intrudes in our neighbourhood relationships.
Even if I can keep reporting anonymous I still dont think its good that the offender will point fingers at people who they suspect turned them in.

Overall I do think it is unjust.
​

​

 

[JJ1989]

2242

(if you are required to support reporting suspicions rather than being required to report such a thing when you have a moral certitude).

It does actually say that you need to have a good amount of certainity when reporting the crime. But in my opinion it could still be detraction.
​

​

 

[Scoobyshme]

We are not, in any way, obligated to obey any moral law which contradicts natural or Divine law. Case in point: “Legalized” abortion. We are not obligated in any way to support or follow this law.

There’s a few good audio talks about the Natural Law that you can download and listen to from the following (just right click on 'em, then left click on Save Target As if you’re using Internet Explorer), if you’re interested:

alabamacatholicresources.com/Downloads/Natural_Law-1.mp3 (By Dr. Charles E. Rice)

alabamacatholicresources.com/Downloads/Jay%20Budziszewski-Natural_Law_Moral_Truth_and_Conscience.mp3 (By Dr. J. Budziszewski)

alabamacatholicresources.com/Downloads/Francis_Beckwith-Natural_Law_Natural_Rights.mp3 (By Dr. Francis Beckwith)

alabamacatholicresources.com/Downloads/Francis_Beckwith-Faith_and_Law_Lecture.mp3 (By Dr. Francis Beckwith)

God bless!

 

[JJ1989]

thanks scooby
the legal issue in my question doesnt deal with abortion or anything interrupting natural law (even though i do see it as a civil right infringement) but still interesting to hear some of these recordings.

 

[thistle]

Hi again,

Just a question on civil law: Is it justifiable to break a civil law when your reasoning doesnt agree?
In my situation I live in an Australian state where it is obligatory to notify the police when you know of a serious crime being committed (unless you have a reasonable excuse).
This law actually seems helpful in cases such as rape, murder etc but I think its unreasonable to be forced to turn in people you know on other cases such as fraud. The reaoson why I think it is unreasonable is because it seems to interrupt our private associations with our family/friends
and I don’t think its right to force us to do the policing job (even though i dont support nor condone criminal activity).

Would anyone agree that this law can be morally broken?

I would not agree.
There is nothing in that law that contradicts Church teachings on faith and morals. Therefore you have no right to ignore that law.

 

[The_Old_Medic]

If you know that someone is committing fraud, either on others or on the state, and you do not report them, you are just as guilty of sin as they are.

To condone wrongdoing, just because you like the people (or are related to them) is wrong.

If you knew your brother had committed rape on a 14 year old girl, would you have a moral obligation to report him to the police? Yes, you would, if for no other reason than to prevent this from happening to another young girl.

The same is true with fraud. You know that someone is obtaining funds by illicit means. You have a moral obligation (and a legal one where you live), to report this to the responsible authorities.

Sorry folks, but sin is sin, and all of the excuses in the world will not modify that simple fact.

 

[vera_dicere]

You know what else fraud is usually called? Stealing.

God’s been pretty clear on that one.

While you haven’t given us the full story, the reality is you aren’t turnign them in because you feel it would breach some kind of friendship/family relationship between you and the offender, well, look at it this way, they’re actions are endangering your soul.

What’s more important to you, your soul or a mortal relationship with a criminal?

And that’s what they are, don’t mince words, if someone is doing something illegal they’re a criminal. This isn’t some person hiding pregnant women from Chineses family planning officials, or someone smuggling Jews out of Nazi Germany. This is you covering up for, or refusing to report someone’s stealing because you don’t want hurt feelings.

Not to mention, if you get busted for being involved in this, what do you think the judge is going to say? “Oh, that’s okay, bcause you were morally opposed to anti-fraud laws, you can go free”. I’m sure there are plenty of peopel who think laws against drug use, prosititution and the likes are silly.

Fraud is stealing. You know of someone’s stealing and you’re not reporting it. You’re as guilty as they are, if not more so because you’re in a position to do something about it.

Another thing, you’re endangering their soul! If they get caught out then it will force them to admit their wrong, and maybe see the wrong, and maybe sort their morality out with God. They could go on to committ a worse crime, or a worse fraud. Just remember, what those Enron guys did was Fraud.

Its stealing. Its against the law. You can’t get around that. It breaks God’s law.

I’m sorry if that sounded uncharitable or ranty, but stealing/fraud really isn’t classy at all. Stop trying to justify what is theift and do the right thign for all concerned.

Unless this person was embezzeling so they could feed their family, but something makes me doubt it.

 

[St_Francis]

Hi again,

Just a question on civil law: Is it justifiable to break a civil law when your reasoning doesnt agree?
In my situation I live in an Australian state where it is obligatory to notify the police when you know of a serious crime being committed (unless you have a reasonable excuse).
This law actually seems helpful in cases such as rape, murder etc but I think its unreasonable to be forced to turn in people you know on other cases such as fraud. The reaoson why I think it is unreasonable is because it seems to interrupt our private associations with our family/friends
and I don’t think its right to force us to do the policing job (even though i dont support nor condone criminal activity).

Would anyone agree that this law can be morally broken?

What types of laws being broken does this law mandate you report? How much certainty do they want you to have to report?

The other thing is that the police are protecting *you. *It’s not like there is a division between them and you, so that they have their job to do and you have nothing to do with it. When you can help them, you ought to do so. When your house is burglarized, do you say, “Well, it’s the police’s job, I don’t see why I have to do their job for them. They should know about this and I shouldn’t have to inform them about it.” No way!!! You pick up the phone and tell them about it!!!

And consider this, suppose your neighbor had seen the crime in progress, but hadn’t called the police because, after all, there’s no reason for him to do the police’s job for them.

As to this issue of crimes to commit, say you know with great certainty that Mr X is committing a crime. It is a crime listed as one you must report. Suppose that you didn’t report it, and Mr X committed that crime against someone you care about? Suppose he embezzled funds from your company, which subsequently went out of business, and cost you your job? (Which actually happened to a small business owner I knew.)

 

[JJ1989]

after reading all those ranty lectures u just posted up no one seemed to take safety into consideration…these people dont stand alone! Even if i stay hidden what if they seek revenge on someone else…then I’ll feel responsible.

And if you say we can stop thieves how about snitching on every person you know downloading illegal music…that’ll be friends, family, work collegues maybe even your own kids.

Sometimes its better to keep it zipped. Not to mention all the wrongs we’ve done. If God has been merciful to save us from getting into trouble with the authorities then maybe we should stop being hypocrites. From my experience the teacher who couldnt tame his tongue about my brother caused him to get expelled from school, then as a result my brother was then associating with worse people at the new corrupt school (because thats the only school to accept him). funny how this teacher received no mercy years later (over such a trivial matter by the way) he was pretty much shifted away from the school.

And finally please dont mention rape, murder. Innocent civilians have no defence whereas the government has every way to protect its money but fails to do so.

Thats it for me…my personal experiences count and im not a black or white person… Sometimes the shades of grey are more visible.

 

[St_Francis]

What was the point of your asking this question if you already had your mind made up?

 

[puzzleannie]

have not seen the actual text of law in question but the Church certainly upholds similar laws in the US particularly the one about reporting known or suspected abuse of a minor, or abuse of anyone on the part of clergy or those functioning in any capacity under church auspices to civil authority. Nothing about the OP’s law contradicts God’s law, assuming it, like most such laws, exempt clergy, attorney and physician client privilege.

Am more concerned with the assumption underlying OP’s question. In what way shape or form could it be construed as loving to cover up a crime committed by a family member? HOw is a stable healthy relationship to be maintained where there is aiding, abetting, enabling and codepency such failure to report entails?

 

[vera_dicere]

after reading all those ranty lectures u just posted up no one seemed to take safety into consideration…these people dont stand alone! Even if i stay hidden what if they seek revenge on someone else…then I’ll feel responsible.

So first its was you didn’t want to report because of close relationships with this person, and now you’re afraid for your safety?

Its lookign pretty obvious you just dont’ want to report a crime you know is a crime. And if these people are revenge sorts of people for you reporting their fraud, then obviously this isn’t as low key as someone dipping into the social club’s petty cash at work.

And if you say we can stop thieves how about snitching on every person you know downloading illegal music…that’ll be friends, family, work collegues maybe even your own kids.

Do you knnow what a strawman is?

As others have said, why did you even ask this question if you’ve so obviously already made up your mind? Were you hoping a bunch of online Catholic strangers woudl stroke your conscience and tell you its’ okay to let someone get away with stealing of sucha level the theives would get revenge on you if you narked?

 

[JJ1989]

Hi guys,

Just want to apologise for any scandal I could have caused on this thread with my original post and my other replies. I now see the need to obey civil law (when it does not go aganist God’s morals) and the need to avoid cooperating in the sin of others. By reporting the crime we are actually being charitable to others by stopping further offences of others and hopefully turning the offender away from evil. Moreover we would be freed from the sin of aiding another in sin. Other than that, the advice of a priest/spiritual director can help out when its a tough or doubtful situation.

 

[St_Francis]

Hi guys,

Just want to apologise for any scandal I could have caused on this thread with my original post and my other replies. I now see the need to obey civil law (when it does not go aganist God’s morals) and the need to avoid cooperating in the sin of others. By reporting the crime we are actually being charitable to others by stopping further offences of others and hopefully turning the offender away from evil. Moreover we would be freed from the sin of aiding another in sin. Other than that, the advice of a priest/spiritual director can help out when its a tough or doubtful situation.

What a lovely and gracious apology and update. Thanks so much .

 

[JimG]

have not seen the actual text of law in question but the Church certainly upholds similar laws in the US particularly the one about reporting known or suspected abuse of a minor, or abuse of anyone on the part of clergy or those functioning in any capacity under church auspices to civil authority. Nothing about the OP’s law contradicts God’s law, assuming it, like most such laws, exempt clergy, attorney and physician client privilege.

I agree with this. Of course you have noted the necessary exceptions to mandatory reporting requirements. A priest could not disclose anything told to him in the sacrament of reconciliation, regardless of mandatory reporting requirements. He would, on the contrary, be mandated not to disclose anything he heard in confession.

I have several minor qualms. I wonder if such laws run the risk of turning us into a nation of paranoid tattlers. “What is my neighbor doing and should I tell the authorities?” And one might wonder not just “What will the neighbors think?” but “What will the neighbors think and who will they tell?”

In my youth it was considered bad form among the siblings to rat each other out to our parents and we seldom did so.

But more worrisome than that, in such a litigious society such as ours, what if we are wrong? It would not be unheard of to be sued for making a false report.