道德难题与立法选择——法律道德主义立场及实践检讨

Ethical Dilemmas and Legislative Options

传统的法律道德主义者认为国家对道德事务享有判断权,并且在必要时为了保护社会可以动用法律限制公民的道德自由。然而该理论却无法回应"道德民粹主义"和"经验主义"的批评,在此基础上发展出来的新法律道德主义理论尽管精致,但仍然面临着"帕累托挑战"和"权衡难题"。有关法律道德主义的主要争议并不在于道德是否能够入法,而在于其入法的限度和具体方式。中国的立法、执法及司法的各阶段中均存在着不尽相同的法律道德主义形态,隐藏于其背后的"道德的法律强制"值得警惕,我们无法一劳永逸地确定出一条自由社会的道德底线,而注重各种价值之间的权衡却实属重要。

Traditional legal moralism argues that the government is entitled to judge on moral matters, and when neces sary, it may utilize the law to restrict citizen＇s moral freedom in order to protect the society. However, this theory is unable to respond to the challenges of moral populism and empiricism, the new legal moralism theory developed on this basis also still faces＂ Pareto challenge＂ and＂ problem of weigh＂. Major controversies about legal moralism lies not in whether morals can get into laws, but in the limits of its penetration and concrete ways. Different forms of legal moralism do exist in the various sta ges of China＇ s legislative, executive and judicial process, the ＂legal enforcement of morals＂ hidden in the above three process should be taken into consideration seriously. We are unable to determine the moral bottom line for a free society once for all, but focus on the balance between a variety of values is very important.