The law will argue any thing, with any body who will pay the law for the use of its brains and its time.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I object to a legal approach when settling questions of science or scientific behavior.
In the first place I remark that no human law is perfect in its construction or execution.
One might rationally argue that individual human beings should be free choose what moral behavior they approve of, and which they don't, subject to the constraints of the law.
Every lawsuit results from somebody doing something wrong. If everybody did right, we wouldn't need laws.
If the laws could speak for themselves, they would complain of the lawyers.
A law is a law, and it has to be respected.
The Law is the Law!
Either the law exists, or it does not.
Law is mind without reason.
Any law can be changed, obviously, at any time.