Talk:Rule according to higher law

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rule according to higher law article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 3 years

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Singular vs Plural / Individual vs Community[edit]

Legislation is not law; gravity is, or electro-magnetism, or time.

Law defined as legislation is dictatorial - regardless of how many dictators there are: one prince/king/emperor, a triumvirate or 50% plus a single vote in parliament to oppress/suppress the individual's personal freedom. This freedom is, however, limited: it can/must/may not limit any other individual's equal right or freedom, regardless of teh question whether individuals are equal. (see: Robert A. Heinlein - For Us, the Living (novel) 1938)

Community depends on and is served by the individual and his/her right(s). If a right can be abrogated; then it is a mere privilege, not of him/her inherently. Therefore legislation cannot be deemed supreme law (if there is such concept outside mathematics). (see: Frank van Dun (university of Gent, Belgium / Maastricht, Netherlands) - The Lawful and the Legal 1983?)

Hence (post 1949 German legislation; following the Neurenberg trials, in which some defendants adhered to the "Führer-principle" - blaming, or shoving all responsability to, the high command) the individual may act according to or adhere to 'unjust' legislation if, and only if, his/her, or a relative's life/limb are at stake, and not be prosecuted for such action, or lack thereof. Still, this is not, in principle, law - however just it may seem - only (just) gut feeling.Sintermerte (talk) 01:52, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]