What this country (UK) needs is someone with a decent amount of common sense to go through a list of all laws (could take a while) and cross out the ones which are too petty to be reasonable. Obviously, many laws are correct and prevent social problems, eg obvious ones like not murdering people.

Of course, you should not follow laws that are "wrong" (immoral/unethical?). The problem is, where should the line be drawn?

.....it would be interesting to know what State he lives in. I have heard that some American States are very conservative about sexual relations.

It is funny how sex can have such a powerful hold over our lawmakers. The kid who got ten years for consensual sex, it would be interesting to know what State he lives in. I have heard that some American States are very conservative about sexual relations.
I hope he can appeal successfully against his sentence. I take it that the girl he had sex with was not underage? Even if she consented it could still be an offence if she is too young.

It is funny how sex can have such a powerful hold over our lawmakers. The kid who got ten years for consensual sex, it would be interesting to know what State he lives in. I have heard that some American States are very conservative about sexual relations.
I hope he can appeal successfully against his sentence. I take it that the girl he had sex with was not underage? Even if she consented it could still be an offence if she is too young.

To take up an idea from the "Illegal Immigration - right or wrong" thread:
I wonder if it's always right to strictly obey the laws, or is it better to take laws as a guideline as long as they are morally and ethically right?

Having sexual relations with an underage person (and 15 is underage in most every jurisdiction in this nation) is not only a crime, but is morally wrong.

Will you SETI crunchers hear me or are we billions of people outside of the USA's 120 or so million not to be listened to?

Uhh.. cRunchy, I think your figures need to be updated a bit. The USA's current population is around 300 million, not 120 million. 301139947 according to the CIA's estimate for July 2007 (next month's estimated figure).

It hasn't been 120 million since just prior to 1930.

Doesn't it depend in part on who you are, what you do, and what your position in society is?

To give one exaggerated example for clarity's sake: To follow the laws all the time would be ridiculous if you were a professional criminal. However, if you were a Judge, it's the minimum that's expected of you.

Doesn't it depend in part on who you are, what you do, and what your position in society is?

To give one exaggerated example for clarity's sake: To follow the laws all the time would be ridiculous if you were a professional criminal. However, if you were a Judge, it's the minimum that's expected of you.

...or a criminal on parole.

True, but if he doesn't want any chance of going back he has to be like the judge.

Gandhi refused to follow certain laws, and he did that to bring attention to their immorality, but critical to his action was his willingness to take the consequences. Most people don't apply that aspect of "civil disobedience".

Kind of like "passive resistances" and bans. ;)

True enough. If someone is banned from these boards for not following the rules, especially if they purposely violated the rules to bring attention to some perceived unfairness, then that person should be willing to take the punishment, that is, remain banned. Otherwise, they are just acting like spoiled brats, throwing a tantrum and trying and get their way.

I don't know of any repealed bans except for two way back in late September. :) Just remember, now, folks! No Marzipan cake stuff, lol! But, if you get banned for posting them, because they link to pix of unclothed dolls with upper body female body parts showing, you can become a mod a few months later. ;)

"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me

But what if the law is really, REALLY annoying ?