Skip to main content

Advertisement

Advertisement

Law may be ineffective, but this doesn’t justify inaction

In responding to my letter, “Extramarital dating site: Society has right to enforce public morality” (Oct 28), Mr Cephas Yee observed that the law might be ineffective in regulating adultery websites. (“Ban on extramarital dating site would just be a paper tiger”; Oct 30)

Adultery website operators may not feel the sting of a fine or even imprisonment, but society’s condemnation will deter would-be operators by threatening where it hurts the most: The bottom line. Photo: Reuters

Adultery website operators may not feel the sting of a fine or even imprisonment, but society’s condemnation will deter would-be operators by threatening where it hurts the most: The bottom line. Photo: Reuters

Follow TODAY on WhatsApp
Makoto Hong Cheng

In responding to my letter, “Extramarital dating site: Society has right to enforce public morality” (Oct 28), Mr Cephas Yee observed that the law might be ineffective in regulating adultery websites. (“Ban on extramarital dating site would just be a paper tiger”; Oct 30)

While I agree, I suggest three reasons this is insufficient to justify inaction. First, if the issue were about criminalising adultery, legislators would certainly have to balance privacy claims and enforcement difficulties against public interest.

Other objections, including the recognition that the law must tolerate the maximum individual freedom consistent with society’s integrity, would also have to be addressed.

Corporate bodies like Avid Life Media (owns the Ashley Madison site), though, are not claiming the right to privacy in seeking to operate here. Unlike the adulterer, its proposed act falls within the public sphere.

Also, the Government’s proposed public consultation to formulate the best method to block illegal file-sharing websites suggests that the difficulties in Internet regulation are surmountable. (“Govt mulls over blocking of some file-sharing sites to fight piracy”; Oct 22)

The coincidence of these two pressing issues may signal the opportunity to formulate a coherent strategy against harmful conduct that can spread via Internet content, whether adultery, online piracy or otherwise.

Second, to dismiss a ban as “merely symbolic” is to underestimate the function of the law, especially criminal law, which has two central purposes: To reduce the occurrence of acts that should not be done and to condemn those who do what should not be done.

Granted, adultery website operators may not feel the sting of a fine or even imprisonment. Society’s condemnation, however, will deter would-be operators by threatening where it hurts the most: The bottom line.

A clear message that society abhors and will thwart attempts to profit from immorality must be sent, not only by a “mere ban” but also through legislation and active prosecution.

Third, inaction similarly has a function. It would send a signal that our moral judgment against the proliferation of adultery is weak. It may beget a self-fulfilling prophecy.

One counter-argument is that the law should be slow to act in moral matters because moral standards may shift by the next generation.

I also recognise that the law, often criticised as blunt and inflexible, cannot stand alone as a regulatory tool, nor reduce the temptation of the forbidden fruit for seasoned adulterers.

But these weaknesses do not diminish the law’s role in legitimising complementary strategies and, more importantly, making society accountable for the moral standards and social institutions it treasures.

The issue is not whether the law should prevent the proliferation of adultery, but how it should be formulated and what complementary strategies should be adopted.

Read more of the latest in

Advertisement

Advertisement

Stay in the know. Anytime. Anywhere.

Subscribe to get daily news updates, insights and must reads delivered straight to your inbox.

By clicking subscribe, I agree for my personal data to be used to send me TODAY newsletters, promotional offers and for research and analysis.