Amendable Laws: Implicit vs Explicit

Implicit Amendable Laws

• Implicit amendability suggests laws can be changed even if not explicitly stated as such.
• It often arises from evolving societal values or understandings of earlier laws.
• The interpretation and application of existing laws can change over time, effectively achieving amendment.
• It's a dynamic process dependent on judicial interpretation and societal norms.
• This approach can introduce flexibility but may also lead to uncertainty in legal application.

Explicit Amendable Laws

• Explicit amendability refers to laws that clearly outline procedures for changes.
• This usually involves formal processes like legislative votes, constitutional conventions, or referendums.
• These methods are designed to ensure accountability and transparency in modifying laws.
• Clear procedures and public input help to limit the potential for arbitrary changes.
• Explicit amendability aims for stability in the legal framework by following established procedures.

Theological Argument for Amendable Laws

• Theological arguments often connect the potential for societal evolution in the interpretation and amendment of laws to the actions of divine beings.
• Some argue laws are not cast in stone, but instead can be adapted to reflect a changing understanding of divine will or purpose.
• Different religious interpretations would inform varying perspectives on amendability.
• Consideration of moral progress and adaptation to new circumstances within a theological framework could be invoked in arguing for amendable laws.
• Varying theological arguments might lead to different conclusions on the extent of, and guidelines for, amendable laws.

Coherence Argument for Amendable Laws

• The coherence argument proposes that amendable laws are essential to maintain a consistent and harmonious legal system.
• Laws are viewed not in isolation but as interconnected parts of a larger framework.
• Amendments are needed to reconcile laws with evolving circumstances and values, ensuring their continued relevance and practical application.
• Disjointed or outdated laws create incongruities that undermine the entire legal system.
• The argument for coherence is based on the idea that a sound legal system cannot thrive on inconsistency. Maintaining coherence within laws is a driving force behind the need for amendment.