I'm sorry, my mistake. What am I doing, really? Expecting basic logic and decency from a leaf shitposter? Well, since I'm this deep in it, better end the job.
>By your logic, in canada, fucking a dog is moral because it's legal.
There are several misconceptions in this one sentence. Let's start from the most basic ones:
>If it's legal it has to be done
This idea that doing something that is allowed is following the law is wrong. Despite how we usually speak, and some politicians may subvert it, the law doesn't allow things, it prohibits. Following the law is doing things according to the law (for example, doing something that can only be done in that way according to the legislation), or avoiding something that has been prohibited.
Doing something that isn't banned is simply making use of your personal freedom. In short, your action doesn't exist for the law.
>If it's the law, it is moral
Wrong. If you read my post with enough care you would find this sentence:
>It's civic to follow the laws of your country if they aren't imoral
The "if they aren't imoral" part implies that there are, or can be created, imoral laws. Thus, a country's law isn't necessarily tied to morality.
>If the law doesn't prohibit it, it must be moral
Wrong. In many places adultery isn't a crime, yet it is far from moral. Since morality isn't tied to the legislation, there can be imoral actions that can be done freely. It is your choice to do or not do them.
Now, to finish it:
No, by my logic it isn't moral to fuck a dog in Canada. If it's legal you're free to do it, but the moral value of the act still persists. If you still can't follow, let me dumb it down for you:
>Fucking a dog, using weed, drinking alcohol is imoral. It doesn't matter the law of the country.
>Doing something against the law, if the law itself isn't imoral, is also imoral.
>Just because you can do it, doesn't mean you should.
>Doing something imoral, while it being against a law, is even worse.
