One of my chief objections to many in conservative and libertarian circles is the assumption that if someone can get someone to sign a contract with a certain provision in it, then that provision is not only legally, but also morally, binding.
I've got trouble with that idea, to put it mildly. For starters, the Scriptures DO limit the kinds of contracts one can impose on a poor man--no usury, and you cannot take a man's cloak (also his blanket) as security for a debt overnight. So clearly, there is no automatic equivalence between "what you can get in a contract" and "what is moral," especially when you're dealing with those who are poor or otherwise defenseless.
It may be only the tip of the iceberg, though. In his 1978 commencement address at Harvard, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn noted (among other things) that our country was rapidly becoming one in which the legal standard appeared to him to be the only one that we would heed--and for that reason, our model was no longer one he could recommend for his native land.
The Advent of Murder by Martha Ockley - About the Book – Faith Morgan, former policewoman and vicar of the small English village of Little Worthy, goes to visit one of her parishioners at his far...
1 hour ago