Every law is a moral statement

Apparently people like to classify things. It makes life more manageable to get everything into categories. The biblical book of Proverbs lists “six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him” (6:16-19). Christian ethics identifies the “seven deadly sins” as wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy, and gluttony. And Gandhi lists them as

           Wealth without works 
           Pleasure without conscience 
           Knowledge without character, 
           Commerce without morality 
           Science without humanity 
           Worship without sacrifice 
           Politics without principle.

Upon comparison you will find the three lists somewhat dissimilar. For instance, Gandhi’s “questionable politics” is not included in Proverbs, whose “sowing discord” is not in Christian ethics, whose “gluttony” is not mentioned by the Hindu master. However the primary difference between the lists is that while the first two tell you what you are not to do, the third tells you how you are to do what you are free to do. So Proverbs lists things that the Lord hates (obviously implying that we should not do them) and Christian ethics warns against the seven deadly sins. These are things that should not be done. While Gandhi would probably agree with these negatives, he would rather state his ethical maxims more positively. Let’s think about how we should live, not about what we shouldn’t do. For instance, it’s fine to have an abundance but use it for the benefit of others. Worship is good but it is designed to encourage sacrifice for others. Knowledge is good but apart from integrity it will not have a positive influence on society.
       Note that Gandhi presents his seven deadly more as general 
principles than specific injunctions. He does not say, “Thou shalt not develop and use a poison gas against your enemies.” While that would undoubtedly fall in his category of “science without humanity,” it is simply a particular example of a moral principle. It is the principle that lies at the heart of the ethical system. To draw up an inventory of every possible example of how a principle might express itself would obviously be impossible. Far more effective is to teach the fundamental truth and expect the individual to learn how it applies in every aspect of life.
       We consider ourselves to be a nation under law. But each individual law is an expression of a moral principle. “Speed limit 60” calls our attention to the fact that in that particular section of highway to travel at a faster rate is to risk the welfare of others. The speed limit is a “law” in the sense that it helps us understand what society feels is the proper speed so all will benefit. In a morally perfect world it would be unnecessary because everyone would live with the welfare of the other in mind. In an ultimate sense, morality calls for dealing with social problems in terms of their underlying principles, not simply with how they might express themselves in particular situations.