How does one support an argument which is both immoral and illegal? (laws, cocaine)

[Econolodge-911]

Here's how you do it:

Deconstruct the morality involved. All moral standards are arbitrary at some level, you can always break them down, build them back up into a straw man and get people to question them.

Find cases of hypocrisy among the opposition. While it is a fallacious 'ad hominen,' it is still effective. If someone argues that something is morally wrong, and you can catch them at /doing/ something (else) they say is morally wrong, you undercut their position on an emotional level.

Draw parallels between the legal enforcement of this moral issue, and the past use of morality as a pretext for oppression. Going straight for the Nazi comparison is getting a bit passe, but there's plenty to work with out there.

That's how you attack the morality angle.

You can also attack the legality, especially in America. We have lots of protected rights in America, and it's always possible to assert new 'implied' rights if you can find a sympathetic activist judge.

Willfully misconstrue the law in question as racist. There are lots of ways to this. If an identifiable minority engages in the illegal activity disproportionately, for instance, they will be disproportionately represented among those apprehended. Show the statistical anomaly between that minority's proportion of the population and their proportion of those apprehended, and attribute the difference to racism. If anyone brings up that they actually commit the crime more, accuse them of racism - or, if you're more sophisticated, say that past and ongoing discrimination /forces/ the criminal activity upon them.

Bring up the separation of church and state. If the activity is immoral, chances are (since most morality has a foundation in one or more religions) there are active evangelical religions who are against the activity. Pick one and portray the law as enforcing their religious doctrine, which would be an unconstitutional establishment of religion. (For instance, the Bible says "Thou Shalt not Kill," therefor laws against murder are unconstitutional because they establish Christianity as a state religion).

Re-define the immoral activity as a right. That's easier if it's 'victimless' in some sense, and only involves adults who are free to choose whether to engage in the activity, of course, but you can at least give it a shot.

If the law exists at the Federal level, assert the rights of the States. If the law exists at the State level, assert the primacy of Federal law.

[TKramar]

So...cocaine sold by whites is punishable by "x"...per gram. And crack cocaine, sold by blacks, is punishable by 3x...per gram? That's equitable, right?

[TKramar]

Or even better!

The average person who does activity "x" is jailed for a set number of years. But if you're a celebrity, you pay a sizable, but cheap, fine, and get out of jail entirely, right?

[SimpleMan]

Originally Posted by TKramar

Or even better!

The average person who does activity "x" is jailed for a set number of years. But if you're a celebrity, you pay a sizable, but cheap, fine, and get out of jail entirely, right?

Like O.J.? That's not about race, it's about how much money you have and how morally bankrupt the lawyers you hire are.

[TKramar]

Naw, O.J. was the subject of a murder trial, and could have gone away.

I'm thinking more about actors and actresses who have been charged with drug offenses, DUI. Things like that.

There was a female tennis player--I want to say Monica Seles? Lives in Florida?--that went to court for shoplifting. You or I would have probably gone to jail, but I am sure she got out of it without any jail time whatsoever.

[SimpleMan]

All it takes is money, and you can get out of pretty much anything up to murder.