It 's a bit of time we reflect on, but this slogan - non-negotiable values \u200b\u200b- I do not like at all. Implicitly means that if some values \u200b\u200bare not negotiable (life, family ...), others are (freedom? Justice?). So, paradoxically, that happens in the negotiations on the values \u200b\u200bthat constitute a political community, all values \u200b\u200bbecome the object of exchange. The values \u200b\u200bstated gait, in the game of negotiations, they just lower the "price" of those transferable: I do not touch the family, in return, however, you close your eyes on freedom ... exchange, then, becomes indecent. If "life" is an untouchable value, then Franco's Spain, where abortion was banned, it was perhaps preferable to the Kohl of Germany? Mussolini's Italy to Berlusconi? It 'an exchange can not, because in contrast to some other values, as if they were not complementary and substitute goods, parts of an organic whole, yet it is precisely this slogan - non-negotiable values \u200b\u200b- which suggests it.
Perhaps the truth is that no value is negotiable and that the parliament does not negotiate anything of value, but see, that is the practical translation and sketchy, always imperfect, of values. The role of the legislature is not, therefore, to oppose to an opposite value to another value, but groped to integrate, reconcile and understand each value, so that the law is really a tool for the common good.
0 comments:
Post a Comment