Due to an unintentional hijack by me, this issue came up in the Pit thread about (former) justice Moore in Alabama. I am copying the relevant posts here in the event that people still wish to discuss it.
[QUOTE=me]
Moore reminds me of some of those people in the Jury Nullification thread, who think that their personal opinion trumps established legal processes. Plus megalomania.
[/QUOTE]
This is all wrong on so many levels.
First, what I am defending is the principle that the legal system ought not to be overthrown, in any case, by the individual opinions of one person. It doesn’t matter if that opinion is right or wrong. You might have supporters in your posited case, but they would be just as wrong as you are (about this point, not about their support for LGBT rights).
Second, it is not “the law” that is the epitome of virtue, it is the legal process that protects us from anarchy and vigilantism.
Third, no legal system or process is ever going to be perfect. If your standard is “it has to be perfect or I don’t support it” then you are doomed to a lifetime of complete disappointment. You are free to argue about it, but you ought not to be free to act in the way you propose.
(What follows did not appear in the other thread): I would like to add that of course (former) justice Moore thinks that the legal system is unfair and unjust as applied to his case, he as much as said so. What his particular beef with that system is is not relevant to the principle.