Philosophy of Law: Case Study
The Ruritania case unveils the making of, not one, but a few very important laws which are linked by one common thread: same sex couples within an ever-changing society. The first premise is that since each decision in law (custom, jurisprudence and edict) affects the next law, timing is the key to dissecting whether or not there were failures to make the law. Additionally, legal acceptance of same-sex couples is a very volatile topic, which has brought about a plethora of public opinion and endured many changes. Examining this case in a chronological manner will help yield the most accurate interpretation of the laws at hand. The modus operendi used in analysis has led to the conclusion that there may have been a failure to make law. However, this is embedded within a framework where many laws adhered to the principles and rules of law making. It is important to briefly outline what was done correctly in order to have a basis of comparison to decide what may have been done wrong.
The 1982 constitutional legislation including the guarantee of equality rights touches on matters of discrimination, which according to Joseph Raz should be institutionalized by general rules. This eliminates flexibility of the law and serves as a durable base, which limits the unpredictability of particular orders. This also ensures stability in the law because general laws reduce the impact of ever changing mores within society. The equality guarantee in Ruritania is very clear and does, in fact, cater towards the same sex component of this case. It states a few specific categories by which discrimination is most commonly and frequently observed. However, it is understood that the law is not solely restricted to these particular orders because of the stable and general statement preceding these specific examples. To quote “Every individual is equal before and under the law…… equal protection and equal benefit…”. It is unnecessary to enter into more detail since this states, very clearly, that every individual should be treated equally, ‘point finale’. Therefore, although in 1982 same sex couples were still very much an obscurity and did not appear in the list of particular examples of discrimination, they were, nonetheless, entitled to the benefits of equality under the general rule of the constitution. It may even be considered that it was this constitution that eventually led homosexuals to more readily expose themselves to the critical eyes of society. Throughout the 1980’s, laws began to recognize sexual orientation to include ideas beyond heterosexuality. This ambiguous time period, when same-sex couples slowly took to the stage, complicates the decision as to whether or not there was a failure to make law. Read more…