Laws Must be Subject to Change

In a free society, laws must be subject to change. Describe a specific situation in which a law should not be subject to change in a free society. Discuss what you think determines whether or not a law in a free society should be subject to change. Laws should ideally serve the best interests of society as a whole. Indeed, a common objective for establishing laws is to ensure order in society and the protection of citizens from physical and economic harm. Government representatives take into account different factors when formulating laws, including, among others, how relevant they are to the affected population. Throughout time, people and their collective philosophies and thoughts change; thus, laws should also evolve according to the times. It may be argued, however, that "foundational" documents, such as the US Constitution, should not be subject to change, or at least, be very difficult to change. The government should have power to enforce laws that are relevant to society and make "sense" to citizens as a whole. For example, the US has gone through a checkered history where certain segments of society have been treated as second class citizens. Jim Crow and anti-miscegenation legislation, at one point in history, were readily accepted by a society which, in large, felt it was normal for blacks to not have equal rights. Furthermore, it was legal in the past to hang people sentenced to death row. Today's society has changed its perception of what entails "cruel and unusual" punishment and many agree overall that the government should not be hanging criminals . Indeed, laws are challenged time to time for being antiquated and not in line with public opinion and sentiments. Some people believe that certain laws should not be subject to change in a free society. For instance, Constitutionalists advocate a strict reading of the country's foundational document, the Constitution. They honor the interpretations of the forefathers and berate "judicial activists" that view the Constitution more as document to be read in the context of modern times. Constitutionalists think that lawmakers should honor the "original" system that has been best envisioned by the ingenious forefathers. Indeed, those wishing to amend the Constitution undergo a more stringent procedure than that required to change or update a normal law. Indeed, the people should have the means to change a law that no longer serves the greater interests of society. In the US, there are several mechanisms, such as direct democracy, to make such changes. The system of checks and balances also helps to ensure that laws are not changed or updated arbitrarily and that government stays accountable to the people. While laws, in general, should be subject to change as society evolves, others like the Constitution are seen as foundational to our form of government---thus, involving more obstacles when people attempt to amend it.