|
作者
|
內容
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2002/5/14 下午 05:51:54
|
|
|
對於政府近日引用公安條例拘捕數名示威人士，有人擔憂這是政府為「選擇性執法」開了先例。當然亦有人提出應再次檢討及修訂公安條例。各位對此有何看法？
「以身試法」，當然有時逃不了法律的制裁。人們稱這是公民抗命，用意就是要違抗自己認為是不合理或不義的法律。基督徒應怎樣思考這問題？
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2002/5/16 上午 10:00:02
|
|
|
不是'有時'逃不過,而是一定逃不過,所以思考這問題時一定'設定'是會被拘捕,才能入到這命題的關鍵處,而不只是academic層面-即'大脊講'。
這裡需要有的是不計個人後果的勇氣,即moral strength prevails over all:我不入地獄,誰入地獄?
不像某些大專生,純為交工課而試法，到頭來人家要出頭為他們開脫 - 正一盞攪兼夾晒時間。
|
|
Josemaria
|
Posted -
2002/5/16 上午 10:59:11
|
|
|
A lot of reflections on this has been done within the Diocese already, like the Justice and Peace Commission.
I have heard some authoritation theologian speaking on this, and views do diverge, though at the end of the day, the agreed premise stands undivided.
Do not just pinpoint on the POO - this incident alone speaks not so much of the underlying concerns of the jurisprudential concerns. Arresting those frequent offenders enough justifies the exercise of the law, though the law itself may call for improvement. On a case by case basis, the POO is alright. But if we want a peace of 'beautifully humanistic' legislation, it of course would not measure up. I wonder how many secular laws would measure up.
The theological enquiry into civil disobedience is an interesting one. I remember Rev. J. de Pedro mentioned very adamantly in his lecture (in response to Martin Lee's question) that he considers social order and peace as something paramount - not to be upset unless there is no other choice.
If there is choice to persuade, to legislate, to solicit opinions, then there is no question of civil disobedience - to push for such would be anti-Christian.
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2002/5/16 上午 11:06:27
|
|
|
我同意到目前為止,香港尚未有一條足以使人有價值地去作公民抗命的'惡法';以此手段來作要脅則似乎真的anti-christian!
|
|
