How it works

 The purpose of law is to delineate what actions are acceptable in a society. That is their sole purpose and intent. Just as John Adams pointed out that our Constitution is only fit for a moral and religious people, so too are our laws. Law will not change human behavior. It will only provide punishment for acting outside of those laws. That, to me, should seem obvious enough for anyone to understand. Yet there are many that would seem to believe otherwise. Some believing we can write laws that will change human behavior just as the Bible and other religious texts are supposed to move their believers. The only difference being the manner of punishment. But that, that isn't how the law works. And it certainly doesn't work that way in a Democracy or Republic. The majority rules in both of those forms of government. The majority decides what is right and wrong. The minorities in those societies will always feel they are not being treated fairly. It doesn't matter what the law says. The law exists to justify the majority opinion. That is true even in a dictatorship or monarchy, the justification in those being, because I said so, and I have the means to force compliance. 

  The purpose of law is to instill restraint among the people. These are the things that will be allowed, and these are the things that will not. Here is the list! Those violating anything on the list will have to answer to proper authority. The United States based its' judiciary on English common law. That had been established following the battle of hastings in 1066. In common law Judges sitting on a court make the laws. They do so based on their interpretation of the law and precedent. In our Republic the Supreme court offers their opinion on the constitutionality of a law, they don't make the law. In our system the people make the law. Congress makes the law, through representatives. Congress is the people.  

 But no matter who actually makes the law its purpose remains the same. to provide penalties for non-compliance. The law is a means for the majority to impose their will upon the minority. The majority can also make laws protecting the minority, from the majority! Self-governance is the objective of a Republic. But in the real world, we all know that it doesn't work that way. Restraint isn't the long suit of mankind. Self-governance is self-restraint. It is doing the right thing even when no one is looking. But without some form of punishment, some determent, few will exercise that restraint. Our Bible tells us we will be eternally damned for non-compliance with the will of God. Our government says you can get a fine or jail time, or death. Well, depending on the time and place and a number of other factors. The big difference being the government isn't like Santa Claus and doesn't see you when you're sleeping, or know when you're awake, the government doesn't know whether you have been bad or good. But the government is working on that! The law exists for you to be good, for goodness sake and provide penalties if you are not.

 The law is the moral compass of any organization, club, community, or nation. That is what laws are made for in the first place. The United States was created and codified using Judeo-Christian ideas of moral and ethical practices. That was the majority. It was also the reason there was no state religion. What is allowed by the Catholics and allowed by the Methodists can differ broadly. You can't base law on religious belief. The Muslim nations do that, combining the two and the results are often very unpleasant. 

 Again, the very reason John Adams said what he did. Our constitution is only adequate for a moral and religious people. Religion providing the impetus for compliance, our laws providing the moral guidance. Slavery, as an example, had been opposed on moral grounds long before the United States was even established. It wasn't on legal grounds. It took the United States of America 89 years to abolish that practice, to codify into law (make immoral) the holding of slaves. Yes, there were those that thought of themselves as religious people that held slaves, it wasn't illegal, therefore it was allowed. The Bible does not specifically condemn the holding of slaves. It just doesn't say that. It does give instructions on how slaves are to be treated though. The same argument is used often enough today, the law doesn't say I can't, therefore I can. It's legal, therefore it is right, is also used frequently. 

 The law is the imposition of morality. That's what it is. Morality, Ethics and Religion are mechanisms to regulate the actions of people. Defining just where the line between law, ethics and morality lies however, is another matter entirely. It is a topic debated since antiquity. There are scholars on all sides of that argument. Religious leaders and Politicians argue that. The everyday man argues the same as well. The argument is really, how much immorality can we accept, or allow? That's because when all is said and done, when the proverbial smoke clears, that is the final question. Men act upon their moral, religious and ethical convictions. That's why they go to war! Morals are all about conviction. Remove the conviction and anything is allowed. Then it is simply, can I get away with this? I can if there is no consequence. That's the law.