Multiple Moralities: Tensions and Tradeoffs in Moral Psychology and the Law

“Moral principle is the foundation of law.” Ronald Dworkin Should gay marriage be legalized? Should abortion be outlawed? Regardless of their answers, people are usually quite confident in them. People have strong intuitions about what behaviors are morally right and wrong, from controversial political and legal issues to everyday interactions with friends, colleagues, and strangers. When the law codifies what we ought to do and what we ought not to do, ordinary moral intuitions influence to some extent what laws are laid down and certainly influence whether those laws are obeyed or broken. The complexity of ordinary intuition presents interesting difficulties for the law. Moral intuitions cover diverse territory. Moral condemnation reaches those who hurt others, those who lie or steal, those who betray their family, friends, or country, those who disrespect or disobey authorities, and even those who eat taboo foods or engage in unusual sexual practices. Given the complexity of this moral space, tensions and tradeoffs abound. For instance, morals, like laws, may function primarily to deter us from victimizing other people, and, in turn, to keep us safe from potential transgressors. However, we often regard many behaviors as immoral or illegal even when there aren’t any victims (e.g., consensual incest, necrophilia). Or, to take another example, people generally regard both fairness and loyalty as desirable moral qualities, but the