Societal Norms: Law, Morality, and Social Customs

Societal Norms: Law, Morality, and Social Mores

Currently, standards or rules of conduct that regulate personal and social behavior are grouped into distinct regulatory codes, each possessing unique characteristics. This situation has arisen from the growing complexity of social life, where each organization often develops its own code of standards, leading to a multiplicity of normative frameworks. Among these various codes, three have always been emphasized: law, morality, and social mores. The primary purpose of these codes has been to align individual behaviors with a model of "official" or accepted conduct. Consequently, they have served as the main agents of control and organization within social life.

Systematic Relationship: Law, Morality, and Social Mores

While the presence and combined action of these three types of rules (law, morality, and social mores) are essential, the importance of each depends on the value society itself places upon them. Therefore, their functional complementarity will undergo constant change.

Complementarity Between Law and Morality

In our time, several factors are contributing to the separation and opposition of morality and law. This fosters a tendency to conceive of a general and common law for all, yet one that is amoral. If law's primary role to unite and pacify social relations were disregarded, it would be in danger, potentially leading to increased conflict. This situation revives the old thesis of independence for law, distinct from moral considerations.

However, this process is hampered by the dehumanizing effects that moral disengagement can have on the law. Consequently, individuals have begun to re-attribute greater importance to moral principles and considerations. It is no wonder, then, that the doctrine of structural and functional complementarity between morality and law is gaining increasing significance.

Indeed, if human behavior is subject to both moral and legal norms, it seems logical that legal regulation should coincide with prevailing beliefs and moral convictions. The acceptance of complementarity between morality and law inevitably raises the question of how to implement its practical effects within the legal system.

There are two primary policy options regarding this implementation:

• Option 1: Minimal Law and Individual Freedom. This approach advocates for full respect for individual freedom, with the law governing only the minimum necessary. This option aligns with diverse religious, political, and moral ideas.
• Option 2: Imposition of Superior Morality. This approach suggests that the law should require societies to uphold principles of a superior morality, where a group legally imposes stronger moral convictions on individuals whose views are not considered acceptable.

Which of these options is more defensible depends heavily on the perspective adopted. On one hand, the law fundamentally serves the individual. Furthermore, legal regulations must be general and uniform for all members of society. Therefore, respect for the law, privacy, and autonomy of the individual must remain a primary and essential postulate. However, it is also inevitable that in cases of conflict, this proposition may yield to the ethical beliefs and fundamental values held by society as a whole.