Would you break the law to save a loved one?
Of course I would, not only a loved one, but life of any person if I would be in such situation.
So to dream up a scenario where I have to imagine breaking the law, as my loved one’s only chance of survival, makes me super uncomfortable, as if I’m tempting fate.
I suppose the invisible line would be the separation between misdemeanors and harsher crimes. I would do whatever it took to save loved ones. But perhaps I’m being too literal. Bottom line, I’d never intentionally harm another to save my family.
http://makesmewander.com/2012/04/06/day95/
Dear Mahmoud
In any situation, one thing to talk from outside and one from inside. The theory and practice are far much on the situation that you raise. I would have to say no, that would not break the law to sabe a loved one I guess as a human, if the situation arrived ...I think we really did not know until situations arise.
Thank you for inviting me to share my opinion about your question. I hope my answer is useful for you.
Regards!
Would you break the law to save a loved one?
Of course I would, not only a loved one, but life of any person if I would be in such situation.
Thank you for interesting views. Let's be honest with each other. Yes its worth to break the law sometimes. Under the circumstances and assumptions hidden in the question, this is the least I can do for a beloved one. In fact, I am willing to go as far as paying a fine or I would not mind following RG questions even in prison!
Hello, Professor. in my opinion there are two kind of law. one of these two, are very critical to pay attention on and in a very simple word it's vital. on this vital laws i think there should be some kind of self care to respect the restrictions. and the second one is laws that is changing or will change over time, these kinds of laws can also be important but most of them are not vital. so if i get in a situation which i have to save a loved one and there is some transient laws which i should deal with, i can get rid of them by convincing myself by this question that "did ever such a law existed?" so it can be ignored secretly.
and vice versa, about the kinds of law which can harm some body or whole of a society physically, mentally or in a futuristic view i am insists on respecting this kinds of laws.
Dear Mahmoud,
Those who I love are fortunately all honest people and not criminals. They do not violate state laws or any other laws. Hypothetically, therefore, I cannot see my own descent to the criminal road for the object of love.
If we have to break the law to save loved one it indicates that there is something wrong with the principle,moral codes &
ethics with our loved one & if this be a cases ,it becomes our moral duty to understand our loved one & by offering all the
useful tips & guidelines so that we may not have to recourse to break the law .
If we have to break our law for loved one it means that for our selfish personal end ,we are breaking our moral code of conduct
& also by the braking the law we fail to fullfill the part as a citizen .
This is my personal opinion
this depends on what the loved one did and the circumstances
Sorry I would NOT, and I have lost many and many lovey persons as a result
Dear colleagues,
Good Day,
Law is a law, it should protect and save everyone, so no need to break any law!
Actually it depends on the type of the crime my loved one has committed and on the situation also. If by any chance they murder someone or rape someone, then I will not protect them. But if they have slapped someone who really misbehaved them and the law punishes them in a way which I find unjust then I will definitely protect them. Suppose someone tries to shoot my niece with a gun and her mother tries to save her and in this process the guy is killed. Then I will try to protect my sister.
Dear Hazim,
If law and what is right are not the same, would you still say "law is law"? Law has two facet: The spirit of the law and the letter of the law. By the spirit the law of love is written upon the heart. Anyway, law may change, but the morality of an action can't.
Dear Mahmoud,
this is really a complicated question, and I was thinking it over and over again today. The only answer I can give is that it depends on the situation.
There is a saying here that law should serve people instead of people serving law. Often laws are expressions of what people in a country / region accept as being morally and ethically correct, and I hope that I will never need to decide whether to break such a law. Other laws, however, may be indifferent and changing due to politics. And a third kind of law is clearly directed against my moral and ethical feelings. Regarding the latter, there is a phrase often used here that is called "civil disobedience" which means that people should stand up against unfair and immoral laws.
Coming back to your question: If you mean "safe the life of somebody I love" - I would do everything which does not severely hurt anybody else. Life should be a higher good than laws. But if you mean "safe somebody from being imprisoned because he/she has done something against the law" then this is a different situation since he/she should be responsible for what he/she has done.
Best regards,
Andrea
Yes...i will but depends on situation and without harming others.
Of course I would break the law, cross the line, break every chain, for the sake of my loved ones, especially, if it were for my children. I'd do anything. I wouldn't stop to think for a second...
The weight of any law depends on the type of state that issue the said law. One remembers Socrates that he choses to die and be lawful. Today that the states are subordinate to the banks order, that spread misery and injustice, the choice is easy. It is nicely described by Ljubomir Jacić!
It is a question of life and death I would do that to save an unknown animal, let alone a loved human being.
Thank you all for your valuable comments. Let me re-phrase the question: "When would you stand up for yourself and those you love, and break the law?" Let me elaborate more by way of a hypothetical situation you may get in. In order to save the life of my loved one's dangerous illness I explored every option to obtain a rather expensive medicine but failed, so i decide to steal that medicine. What are the consequences: 1) Saving the life of a loved one, 2) Getting caught and spend a few months in prison. Which one is more important? I go for 2). Otherwise, would not be a pretty selfish to save the live of loved one from death, just because you are afraid of breaking the law! When should I do the right thing and help my beloved one and forgot the law?Don't you think sometimes we need our own judgment even it is against an unfair rule.
Dear Prof. Omid,
Good Day,
In my humble opinion, Law must not be broken at all times and in all cases. The law must be respected and should be rigorously enforced and for everyone( loving or unloving ones).
There are limitations in that kind of 'law breaking".
For example: is it accepted, in order to save the life of your beloved person, to remove the life of another? Of course not...
So, in general we have strong constraints, provided that we are ethical beings.
Dear Hazim, Thank you again for your comment. We all know that the essence of any law is to bring justice back. But, every system has its flaws. From my previous example, it is pretty clear that some laws may have flaws and do not guarantee justice all the time. For instance, If you compare stealing of the drug (to save your beloved) is much less of an immoral or bad act than letting someone you love to die.
It is allowed to break the law in order to save another person. This is called self-defence. Is it allowed to remove anothers life in order to save another person? Yes. What about all cases that are not self-defence? In those cases you can hardly speak about a situation in which you need to save someone's life.
How about if your beloved one is the attacker? Depends... But it is not like your buddy starts a brawl with someone, the other one aims a gun on him and you need to hold still and watch until he gets shot down befor you can step in.
If it is a Bonny and Clyde thing... make sure to get them all... No plaintiff, no judge *lol*
Law must be respected, it is the word correctly but the man is an unforgettable spirit of the law (humanitarian) any human nature that helps, who was weak, how those who love him downright that sympathy will be greater, I personally broke the law to people who do not know them already, but I sympathized with them
Dear Dr.Omid,
Thank you for your beautiful and actual question.To me,it's a normal behavior if one is going to save life,honor or dignity of a human being (without causing damage to others),even if dura lex sed lex.Life is the most valuable phenomenon.As for a beloved person,the greatest act of breaking all laws of being was a heroic deed of Orpheus.He went down to the land of the dead to bring Eurydice back to life.He tried to do it by force of his love and art."Orpheus and Eurydice"(1762) by C.W.R.von Gluck(L.Kogan and N.Walter), and the picture by greatest J.-B. C.Corot (1861).
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/Jean-Baptiste-Camille_Corot_-_Orpheus_Leading_Eurydice_from_the_Underworld_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UYxPae5O8o
Dear Dr. Hussein Shareef,
Thank you for your valuable contribution. I have a comment, though. Life is not always like the Victor Hugo novel "Les Miserables". I saw the movie, It is the story of the man of law (Javert) and the man of grace (Jean Valjean). Both men come from poverty. One becomes a convict, the other a prison guard and then a police commissioner. Javert is taken as the symbol of an overly strict adherence to the law, who never breaks the law. Javert believes that the law is what is right regardless of consequences. He can never accept the grace given to Jean Valjean the convict. If I was Javert, I would rather stop chasing Valjean for something he committed long ago! There are plenty of good reasons for forgiveness sometimes. By telling this story I don't want to make an excuse for breaking the law, instead maybe sometimes we should take a break.
"The law" in each country is an inevitably flawed attempt to maintain peace and order. There will always be exceptions & inconsistencies. There are plenty of examples when doing what is morally or ethically right is against the law. And, at least in England, the law changes. Our laws are thankfully based on doing what is "reasonable", and are based on previous legal cases where a judge has decided what is "reasonable".
"Where is no law,there is no crime".Littera occidit,spiritus vivificat."When people,who haven't God (values) in their souls, but do something legally... they appear to be the laws of themselves". Sometimes laws can be a tool for humiliation of a person,who isn't very comfortable for the mighty.
http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/aphorism/919/%D0%9F%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%BB
Laws are not all just and useful. So, one has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Let me state one of the quotes tagged as "laws" without further comment: “In truth, laws are always useful to those with possessions and harmful to those who have nothing; from which it follows that the social state is advantageous to men only when all possess something and none has too much.” ― Jean-Jacques Rousseau
I understand the question as if the loved one is not a criminal but is under severe risk, so my view is: God, Him Self, allowed us to break His divine law to save a loved one. Without any hesitation, I will break any law to save a human being NOT only a loved one. The prevailing laws, all over the world, are mostly man-made so they are NOT absolute & ought to be disobeyed when there is a case of life or death.
Would you break the law to save a loved one?
Depending on the particular scenario. For examples:
Scenario1 - when driving e.g. daughter / son to hospital due to life threatening illnesses, one willing to break the law by not properly parking the car in the vicinity of the hospital.
Scenario2 - when driving e.g. daughter / son to hospital due to normal fever, one might not break the law by speeding as it is not worth it (one might engaged in an unnecessary car accident).
There can be scenario whereby some people wiling to do traffic red light speeding when his daughter / son is very ill. Net net depending on one's assessment which decision will bring the most benefits / utility - in line with an ethical theory called utilitarianism. From Internet, Utilitarianism is a theory in normative ethics holding that the best moral action is the one that maximizes utility. Utility is defined in various ways, but is usually related to the well-being of sentient entities.
From utilitarianism point of view I found the following quote which may just be relevant to the ongoing discussion: If you must break the law, do it to seize power: in all other cases observe it.-Julius Caesar
Who want to liberty must break the law of dictatorial regime or to fight terrorism.
" A hero is someone who understands the responsibility that comes with his freedom....Bob Dylan"
I would like to take Han's example and step into the actual discussion of self-moving cars...
Let's say you can decide between two models:
A) You are 'driving' a self-moving car and your child is sitting on the passenger seat. It is something the car does register. All the sudden a group of kids is crossing the street. The car is calculating the danger + the danger for your own child and deciding to rather drive into the group then f.e. into a wall, because when doing so your child may die.
B) Driving into the wall and saving the group. But your child dies.
A) means prison for you (because a judge might say you approved the risk when buying the car). B) means emotional hell.
Which car would you buy? (I do not think this dilemma also works if you are driving the car by yourself...)
I think morale should be at highest level than the law, laws should be think under morale values even for technical needs. If the law is not practical or is source of unfairness, or corruption or harm or cause of incoherence etc... it should be broken. However if one is in urgent need, (s)he could ask some charity organizations for help but shouldn't steal, or for saving a life (s)he shouldn't make harm to others.
Anyway even in justice courts, the decision is allowed to the judge who should make decision on behalf of many parameters and circumstances the morale first.
Thank you for very good comments. Let me make some comments again on our duty and law. There are two types of laws; one is a just law and one is an unjust law. We have a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws in the same way we should obey just laws. Doing right means sometimes ignoring the law. We, too, should have authority and speak out against authority when it’s life and death. Here I bring two quotes from Thomas Jefferson and Mahatma Gandhi . They primarily refer to the influence and authority of law within society,
Thomas Jefferson quote: "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so."
Mahatma Gandhi quote “An unjust law is itself a species of violence. Arrest for its breach is more so. Now the law of nonviolence says that violence should be resisted not by counter-violence but by nonviolence. This I do by breaking the law and by peacefully submitting to arrest and imprisonment.”
To conclude, what we DO and DON'T DO should not be purely based on law but on what we think is RIGHT. (Of course, I don't say we hurt someone else to safe a loved one)
Many times laws are made by people not competent in jurisprudence which could makes many incoherence, missing , mismatching, ....etc ... in the social, or economic or administrative or running regulation of societies.Many times we hear that a government makes a law who could be abrogated later by another one. Laws should define the functioning means of the society, they should be based on the human moral values with adjusting parameters to its current functioning status, preserving general interests of the society and without harm to any component of it, ie to preserve justice to all.
Dear Sir, when it is a stake of your loved one I think personally I would do anything to save my loved one - May it be a sacrifice of me to save my loved one or need to break the law then surely I would do it without second thought but get prepared to accept the consequence for breaking the law but happy to go through it seeing your loved one is safe and fine. there is no bargain to do anything possible as a man I would do it definitely to save my loved one. Thanks
After reading Mahmoud's and Tajudeen's words I would like to invite you to help me 'save' a loved one. I hope you do not take this at advertisement. But in case you do so I am ready to break a 'law' here.
https://www.change.org/p/researchgate-researchgate-violation-of-freedom-of-speech-and-scientific-freedom
Dear @Carmen Wrede. Fortounately, there is a Q&A in RG just about the faith of your loved one (attached link), so continuing this discussion there would be more appropriate than here. I am sure lots of RG members do support the idea. Incidentally, many members were disappeared from RG in the past . There might be many reasons. So it maybe a good idea and more effective act, if you make the petition for all the people who were terminated, removed, left, etc in an unjust way and send it to RG admins. Sometimes I do write to them and found them to be very responsive and cooperative.:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_Happened_to_Akira_Kanda/4
Dear Colleagues,
Good Day,
Please, See what "Thomas Jeffersen" once said, I think some of our Colleagues would like it :
Dear Ljubomir, Very good point of view. But as Drew Barrymore once said: "Love is the hardest habit to break, and the most difficult to satisfy."
Dear Mehree Iqbal
There is a dilemma. Should the society come first or the personal affiliations? I think greater interest deserves greater respect.
Regards
We know neither all laws are just nor lawmakers did not foresee every situation. Do you still think laws are meant to be followed and not to be broken? Our textbook answers would be no, but sometimes especially in life-and-death situations, to get things done, going by the book is not the best option.
Man made law to serve him. He should not serve the law.
Our loved ones treasure us so much that sometimes, when they can’t break the law, they change it for us.
If my loved one is sick, and am rushing them to hospital. I would break all the traffic rules. And if I can get the siren tune I would turn up that car radio up so high.
We should obey the law dear @Mahmoud. Sometimes, when life is in question, people react not very often rationally, but according to their own values. Some of them would break the law in order to save the loved one, some will not, as it was mentioned in some previous answers.
Dear @Ljubomir. Thank you for the response. Let me clarify. I gave aexample in my last comment. I meant if we MUST to save the loved one, then bypassing few less important (man-made) law (than the natural law of nature) is justified.
Rules and regulations are made to save lives. If there is a time when they need to be broken to save someone´s life, I would absolutely break them in order to save not only my loved one´s life but also any one else´s. No matter who the person is. Saving life of people matters.
Dear Colleagues,
Good Day,
"There is but one law for all, namely that law which governs all law, the law of our Creator, the law of humanity, justice, equity - the law of nature and of nations."
--- Edmund Burke
and everyone knows that " Law is the Law" , so I would not break it to save loved one!!!
If breaking of law can lead to save life of someone, then I can do it. But, for selfishness or for favoring beloved one, I never break the low.
I think, favoring the closest/loved one, when they really do not deserve, is one of the major cause of corruption in the world. We all should be strict enough in allowing such things to happen to us.
Regards,
Mahamad Nabab Alam
People who broke the law to change the world: Mandela
Nelson Mandela is, hands down, one of the most important and celebrated figures of our lifetime. Mandela represents equality, fairness, democracy and freedom in an often unequal, unfair and undemocratic world. But he wasn’t always seen like this…
Twenty-five years ago he was getting his first taste of freedom after being imprisoned for 27 years. Yes, you read that right. For what? What could he have done to get such a long sentence? Well, he stood up for what he believed. In 1942 he joined the African National Congress and fought against apartheid in South Africa, and was imprisoned for sabotage.
Without Nelson Mandela’s commitment to the abolition of apartheid in the face of oppression and imprisonment, the world could be a very different place. It is because of Mandela, and others like him, many more people live a free and fair life.
People who broke the law to change the world: Gandhi
India’s great independence leader first went to prison in 1922 for civil disobedience and sedition after a protest march turned violent, and resulted in the deaths of 22 people. The incident deeply affected Gandhi, who called it a “divine warning’.
He was released from prison after serving 5 years of his 6 year sentence, and went on to become the most famous advocate of peaceful protest and campaigning in the world.
Gandhi famously led Indians in challenging the British-imposed salt tax with the 400 km Dandi Salt March in 1930, for which he was imprisoned for a year without trial, and later lead the Quit India Movement, calling for Britain’s withdrawal. He was arrested many times but never gave up. An advocate until the end, Gandhi sadly paid for his beliefs with his life when he was assassinated by a militant nationalist in 1948.
People who broke the law to change the world: Luther King
Martin Luther King had a seismic impact on race relations in the United States, as the face of the Civil-Rights movement in the 1950’s. Through his activism, he played a pivotal role in ending the legal segregation of African-American citizens, as well as the creation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. King received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964, among several other honors.
King was arrested 5 times, and wrote his second most influential speech whilst in prison in 1963 for protesting against the treatment of the black community in Birmingham, Alabama. Letter From Birmingham Jail, which was written on the margins of a newspaper and smuggled out of the prison, defends the strategy of nonviolent resistance to racism, arguing that people have a moral responsibility to break unjust laws. Tragically, in 1968 he was assassinated in his hotel at the age of just 39.
Following the trace of Mahmoud's answers: 8 people who broke the law to change the world!
There are 4 women on the list! They are:
- Aung San Suu Kyi
- Rosa Parks
- Susan Brownell Anthony
- Roxana Saberi
https://www.one.org/us/2015/02/12/8-people-who-broke-the-law-to-change-the-world/
Let us go back to the original question. It was about break the law to save the loved one. This is fine story: Marriage apartheid is illogical in a church with a history of love! This story was replicated in Ireland!
"...We have marriage apartheid in our church, a church with a history of extraordinary love and courage from priests and nuns who fought injustice and were tortured, imprisoned and martyred. Priest and nuns left home to fight for and minster to the excluded in South Africa during the apartheid regime.
You can canon law it all you like, but Irish men and Irish women are excluded from their church because they married the person they love. And their kids suffer because they weren't conceived in a bed. There is no other word. Apartheid it is.
As for the family we told you about at the top of the page, sad to say, their boy was crucified because he preached some sort of story about all of us loving each other."
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/billy-keane/marriage-apartheid-is-illogical-in-a-church-with-a-history-of-love-34737636.html
Dear Ljubomir. Thank you for your answers. I may re-phrase "break the law to save the loved one" in the question. Sometimes "the loved one" is a country or nation with good examples provided already Mandela, Gandhi, ... The legacies of Nelson Mandela and Mahatma Gandhi transcend time, in terms of the impacts they each had on civil rights and equality. All I want to say is this: Man made law are flexible but nature law are permanent.
Reality!
The more laws and order are made prominent, the more thieves and robbers there will be.” ― Lao Tzu
If you violate the law to save the life of a loved one, as long as the action I perform, although illegal, does not endanger the lives of others, and even if my action also improve the lives of others
If the law have been imposed from a dicretorship, then there is no problem to break the law! If the law is imposed from decentralized community, in which I participate, and I voted for the law then I will not break the law!
We can differentiate "right" from "wrong" is one of those which makes us humans. This question, however, is associated to moral and ethical dilemmas such as the question of breaking the law to save a loved one.
This is another answer [Please see the attached link] which was given to a similar question "While some laws are designed for the safety of the general public, they are designed to maintain order under normal conditions, in extreme circumstances the spirit of the law and its flexibility can and in many cases is exercised. So under exigent circumstances a 'yes' is justified."
http://www.bayt.com/en/specialties/q/62149/would-you-break-the-law-to-save-a-loved-one/
“The laws are made to be broken,... if nobody will break them why they are made???” ― Deyth Banger
Saving life of any one including loved one is important than the law!
Undoubtedly, What is more than life? That too life of a loved one? We have to trespass the law , if situation demands it - come what may!!
“Some people will follow their minds without listening to their hearts, and others will follow their hearts without listening to their minds. This is why reason exists, for there to be balance between the heart and mind. We were not meant to follow the mind and ignore the heart. Instead, we were meant to follow the heart over the mind, but without completely abandoning logic. The middle way is the preferred way, and this path simply means to allow your heart to drive you, but do not forget to balance reason with your conscience.” ― Suzy Kassem
The (logical) mind verses (emotional) heart
Undoubtedly, most of us in RG are law abiding citizens but not a robot or machine. So when it comes to save a loved one, then I think I would have to break the law. I’ve realized over the years that my mind and my heart tell me different things. You see we have a dilemma here: What do we do when our heart says 'Yes' but our mind says 'No'?
It is better to risk saving a guilty man than to condemn an innocent one.
--- Voltaire
Thank you dear Subhash for the quote by Voltaire. There is a similar qoute which is also known as Blackstone's formulation. It says: "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer".
From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone%27s_formulation
“No one saves us but ourselves. No one can and no one may. We ourselves must walk the path.”
― Gautama Buddha, Sayings Of Buddha
The purpose of life is not to be happy. It is to be useful, to be honorable, to be compassionate, to have it make some difference that you have lived and lived well. — Ralph Waldo Emerson
“No one is useless in this world who lightens the burdens of another.” – Charles Dickens
“The best way to find yourself is to lose yourself in the service of others.” – Mahatma Gandhi
“As a rule,
I believe people shouldn't follow rules;
rules should follow people.”
― Eric Micha'el Leventhal
The good law requires love to the loved ones. The love does not break the law because the correct law saves to all ones.
I completely concur with Dr. Mariano.
In my point of view, love and law are not in front of each other. They don't have any contradict to one another.
Regards,
Mehdi
Laws are meant to project everyone’s right and welfare of all but in some circumstances it can have the opposite effect. So, it is reasonable to break the law when it would be saving a person's life or for a good cause. If failing to break a law would put someone's life in danger then that law should be broken. Yes, I would certainly do so not only for loved one but also for anybody who would be in a life threatening situation.
“For example, it is OK to avoid the traffic rule if a person is wounded or hurt with a life threatening injury and someone is driving them to the hospital and need to exceed the legal speed limit to get the injured person to the hospital as soon as possible. Since, every minute counts for this person's life and a one or two minutes delay in getting to the hospital may make the difference as to whether that person dies or lives”
“Recent example is Aung San Suu Kyi who was heavily influenced by Gandhi’s philosophy of non-violent protest, helped to found the National League for Democracy. Because of her campaign for democracy in military-ruled Myanmar (Burma), she was detained and kept imprisoned by the government, as it viewed her as someone “likely to undermine the community peace and stability” of the country. She has become an international symbol of peaceful resistance in the face of oppression.”
Since “ blood is thicker than water”, I may break the law if my relation has not committed a heinous crime like:
(i) committing the murder of an innocent
(ii) has taken part in disruptive activities leading to death/s and destruction of t he national property
(iii) has sextually exploited some one
(iv) has proved to be a traiter to my country
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Education