When is it OK to Break The Rules

And what makes people voluntarily obey laws when they do is eitherthat they believe the law is in conformity with what is morally right (orif it is a procedural law, they believe it does not conflict with whatis right) and is just and beneficial, or they believe that the particularlaw at issue is not so bad, even if wrong, that it is justified to break,either because breaking it would cause more harm than not breaking it orbecause breaking it would risk undermining the general cultural respectfor law. But many morally good people will disobey laws they think arevery wrong, either in a form of civil disobedience, or in order to getaway with it (as in speeding on a long straight, flat, open road with notraffic, in the West, particularly when the speed limit was 55 mph), becausethey believe the law does not have moral authority then. And if the governmentpasses sufficiently many bad laws, or sufficiently egregious laws, it willlose obedience by rebellion or revolution, because citizens will believe(sometimes correctly) that the laws and the government are too immoralto have any authority that deserves their obedience.

We have one more Avengers post for you

Is It O.K. to Kill Cyclists? - The New York Times

The Strange Notion of “Gay Celibacy” - Crisis Magazine

A variant of desert theory is the communicative theory ofpunishment, which takes both a forward-looking and a backward-lookingview of the purposes of punishment. The purposes of punishment on acommunicative account are both to convey the state's condemnationof the action and to lead the offender to repent her action and toreform her conduct. On a communicative conception of punishment, thestate aims to engage with the offender in a moral dialogue so that sheappreciates the moral reasons she has to follow the law. According tosome communicative theories, condemnation itself sufficiently justifiespunishment. Punishment may be seen as a secular form of penance thatvividly confronts the offender with the effects of her crime (Duff1998, 162). According to other, less monistic communicative theories,communication of censure alone is insufficient to justify punishment;added to it must be the aim of deterrence (von Hirsch 1998, 171).Still other communicative theories add different considerations to thegrounds for justification. On one pluralistic view, a distinction isdrawn between the punishment that is deserved according to justice andthe punishment that is actually justified. When, for example, anoffender demonstrates repentance for her offence prior to punishment,the law has reason to be merciful toward her and to impose a lesssevere punishment than that which she deserves (Tasioulas 2006). Mercyinvolves a charitable concern for the well-being of the offender as apotential recipient of deserved punishment. Given this offender'srepentance, the justified punishment in this case is less than it wouldbe were there no grounds for mercy.

10 Big Myths About Copyright Explained, by Brad …

None of this is central in the standard Marxist theoretical cannon when clearly, to me, as an urbanist, it should be. I feel entirely comfortable with daily life perspectives and applaud the social anarchist position on this. I do, however, have a caveat: everyday life problems from the perspective of the individual or of the local neighborhood look quite different from everyday life in the city as a whole. This is why the transition from Kropotkin to Patrick Geddes, Mumford and the anarchist- inspired urban planners becomes an important issue for me. How to organize urban life in the city as a whole so that everyday life for everyone is not “nasty, brutish and short” is a question that we radical geographers need to consider. This aspect of the social anarchist tradition – the preparedness to jump scales and integrate local ambitions with metropolitan wide concerns – is invaluable if obviously flawed and I am distressed that most anarchists, including Springer apparently, ignore if not actively reject it presumably because it seems hierarchically inspired or entails negotiating with if not mobilizing state power. It is here, of course, that the Marxist insights on the relation between capital accumulation and urbanization become critical to social action. And it is surely significant that the urban uprisings in Turkey and Brazil in 2013 were animated by everyday life issues as impacted by the dynamics of capital accumulation and that they were metropolitan-wide in their implications.

Is it ever OK to break the law
It's an overview of what a growth-oriented policy program might look like

Dominionism Rising: A Theocratic Movement Hiding in …

Casey's second sentence. "By the book" is seldom a term of praise, and "work to rule" is well known as a technique for deliberately slowing operations. In most organizations you have to know which rules you can break safely and when -- which is something people are really lousy at. And by the nature of promotion in most organizations, "getting things done" earns the promotion, with only minimal attention to how things got done. So as you go up the management ladder you have a population of more and more people who have ignored rules in the course of their rise. (And the ones who ignored rules and failed horribly don't rise, but that's attributed to them, not to the strategy.)

What is friendship? | Scripting News Annex

Jan 28, 2006 · Hi Dave, Nice essay

Requirements of health insurance companies generally include the clause that patients should waive the condition of confidentiality and disclose the medical information to them when a claim for medical coverage is submitted. In case, a lawsuit is brought by the patient against a hospital or doctor for any particular reason, doctor is then allowed to provide related information and medical records as evidence required in the court. Furthermore, there are legal requirements in some states to disclose and share medical information by the doctors if there is a virus or disease that could harm general public and state should provide protection to the people. Doctors can release information about their patients without breaking law or breaching their ethical duty when patient allows doctors to disseminate the information to specific persons or organizations. In case there is an obligation for the doctors, in the public interest, to disclose information, such as a fatal virus that could spread to harm other people's health, then medical information can be provided to the concerned department after seeking legal advice to avoid any undue circumstances. (Kushner 177)

Take A Break From The Manosphere – Return Of Kings

Are Christian and Muslim nations ok and Hindu nations …