Would it be a sin to answer this question?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jjje1995
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jjje1995

Guest
So, as I have mentioned on this forum quite a few times, I am a law student, and I have a three hour exam on Equity and Trusts this Wednesday. I have been studying really, really hard for it, but I am a bit troubled about something.

We have had some flexibility in what we could study as nine out of the ten topics we were taught will be coming up, and I have to answer three of the questions, at least one from the first semester, at least one from the second semester, and one more from either.

One of the topics I chose to study (because I already wrote about it for an assignment in December) is “the Family Home.” This topic is almost certainly coming up and it is most likely going to be a question about someone who has been cohabiting, wants to split up from their partner, and find out whether they have a right to any of the property they shared, and, if so, what the size of that share is. It is also possible this could involve a same-sex couple.

I want to answer this question because it is a very straight-forward topic, and you can get lots of marks, but I am worried that, in doing so, I might be unintentionally affirming irregular unions.

The way I have tried to reason this to myself is that, even with a same-sex couple, if someone wants to split up to end an irregular union so as to turn back to God, they still needs to know whether they have a right to any of the property they shared, but I do not know if this is just me giving a lawyer’s answer so as not to feel guilty.

Please could someone tell me what to do. 😦

Studying another topic in such a little amount of time is not possible.
 
Last edited:
jjje1995 said:
I want to answer this question because it is a very straight-forward topic, and you can get lots of marks, but I am worried that, in doing so, I might be unintentionally affirming irregular unions.

The way I have tried to reason this to myself is that, even with a same-sex couple, if someone wants to split up to end an irregular union so as to turn back to God, they still needs to know whether they have a right to any of the property they shared, but I do not know if this is just me giving a lawyer’s answer so as not to feel guilty.
Click to expand...
I would suggest that you can discuss the legal question of right to property (which is the domain of the state) without getting into the moral question of whether or not there is any validity to so-called “marriages” that aren’t valid (to include “second” marriages, cohabiting members common-law married, homosexual relationships, etc)
 
If you worked in a Pharmacy would it be sinful to sell condoms?
The answer is no.
 
Oh, they won’t be married at all. Under UK law, the concept of “common law marriage” was phased out after the Marriage Act 1753 was passed.
 
Last edited:
Sounds like you might be a 2nd year student.

Let’s fast forward about a year and a half, and you have passed the Bar, and eitherr work for a firm or have hung out your own shingle.

After you passed the Bar and were sworn in ( I am peaking of the US here) and you have a client, it is your job to represent that client to the best of your ability and within the law.

It is not you duty to affirm anything, except what may be their legal rights and responsibilities.

You are not their confessor. Nor are you their psychologist or mental health counselor. You are their attorney, and they have an issue which is in law. You are there to sort out the legal issues - not the moral ones. You may be adamantly against gay unions, gay marriage, people shacking up and any of the permutations which have arisen since then. That has nothing whatsoevr to do with their legal rights.

If someone develops an opinion concerning your affirmation, or lack thereof, of non-marriage relationships, that is their uninformed opinion, and were they to address it to me, I would find a way to tell them that I respect all people, and that I am there to help them within the full extent of the law. And I would make exceedingly sure that I did not express an opinion to anyone as to how I felt/what I thought, as a Catholic.

In becoming an attorney, you are taking up a postion in society. You may choose whether or not people in your parish know what you do - the word always seems to get around anyway. If someone hears that you have been on a case they (for whatever reason - good or misguided) don’t approve of, and they approach you, you can instead of opening your mouth and putting in both feet, simply say something neutral such as “That is a really hot topic” and them ask them questions. And then say something such as “It sounds like you have thought about it quite a bit” and then change topics.

One does not have to be in favor or, or support non-marriage relationships to answer what the law wouold be as to dividing up property upon a breakup. It is a law question, not a morals question.

Keep in mind that the ACLU represented the KKK in Skokie Illinois when those idiots wanted a parade permit. And they won.
 
I studied law and it would never had entered my head that answering such a question would be sinful.

Good luck in your exam.
 
The issue is not so much what the law says as what we do and how we respond to immoral situations. If someone in an irregular situations. If someone is in a ‘gay’ marriage and they are having a divorce then you would actually be helping with the break-up of something immoral.
On the other hand there are other issues in family law that are problematic. People in licit marriages divorcing. fighting over children, Husbands and wives divorcing in no-fault situations where adultery appears to be the norm. Parents in situations where they are unable to take care of their children and the question of who will have custody?
 
I would say it’s not sinful because you are not promoting a cause, just explaining how the law of the land works.

As a lawyer, you know that if you want to change the law of the land, there are appropriate channels and procedures to make that happen.

Good luck with your exam! 🙂
 
You’re just answering a question about what the law is in this situation. Of course that’s not sinful.
 
No, advising someone on civil law is not sinful. You are not responsible for their private lives. Nor is it sinful for a Christian to defend someone in criminal court. That person has a right to representation. The lawyer is not responsible for whatever crimes that person may have committed.
 
Of course not.

Explaining what the law is is not the same as giving your opinion of what the law should be. When you have clients, they’re not going to care about how you would draft the law if you were a legislator.
 
I’m a Catholic - not a lawyer -

Woe unto you, lawyers!
for ye have taken away the key of knowledge:
ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.
45 Then answered one of the lawyers, and said unto him,
Master, thus saying thou reproachest us also.
46 And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers!
for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne,
and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers.
47 Woe unto you!
for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and your fathers killed them.
 
Another excellent post, and others as well from the many Catholic lawyers here. 😊
 
jjje1995 said:
but I am worried that, in doing so, I might be unintentionally affirming irregular unions.
Click to expand...
This seems like a high level of scrupulosity over answering a question on a law school exam.

You are answering a question about how the law applies to cases, not a moral question or opinion on the status of the individuals in the household.
jjje1995 said:
Please could someone tell me what to do. 😦
Click to expand...
Talk to your priest about why this is troubling you at all. Because it’s not a moral question.
 
However, one needs to distinguish between a theocracy and other forms of government and laws. Your reference is to a theocracy; the OP is not discussing that, nor is the OP studying to become a theocratic lawyer. And as a Catholic, it helps to understand that the Church looks upon the work lawyers do as more than slightly different from your quote.
 
Well, actually, the issue is “what does the law say”, not “is the law immoral”.

The issue is not whether one is in an immoral situation and the attorney is helping break it up; it is “what is the purpose of what an attorney does”.

For example, you speak about divorce. We need to keep in mind that the Church approaches all marriages as “presumed valid”, “presumed” being the operatve word. And it is not the duty nor is it anywhere near the realm of responsibility of the attorney to try to investigate if a client is in a valid marriage. That duty belongs to the Church, through its tribunals.

It is the duty of an attorney to resolve (as in the OP’s question) the civil aspects of the marriage. That includes property distribution, custody and related issues. Should the attorney attempt to determine the validity of the marriage, they are usurping the duty of the Church; further, they are potentially violating their oath of office. It is fine to say “I do not do divorce cases at all”. But a lawyer is not forbidden to do divorce case work, and in fact, may be representing a client in a divorce of a marriage that is invalid. That issue of validity/invalidity is the responsibility of the two in the marriage, to resolve through the Church.

Further, the Church, while it abhors divorce, also recognizes that in some instances, divorce may be the only solution to resolving the dispute between the parties; if they are in a valid marriage, they cannot "marry’ someone else. And given the high incidence of spousal abuse, an attorney may well be doing the most moral thing by assiting the breakup of the parties.
 
It would appear that Seagull has never attended a Red Mass.

Nor is that attitude amazing; all too many disdain (I am trying to be polite) those of us in the profession - with the common excption of “my attorney”, who is a hero.
 
Thanks for the kudos. This might turn into a possible teaching moment, since liars (oops, I mean lawyers) are held in such low esteem. 😊
 
Last edited:
Their legal rights are not somehow less simply because of sin. Stick to the law.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top