On May 8, 2005, at 12:14 PM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
Chad Perrin wrote:
To me a fundamental principal of law is that anything which is not specifically forbidden is allowed.
Ec
It isn't a principle of law, the correct principle is "that which is not forbidden is allowed". The specifically changes the meaning entirely.
Perhaps, then, that should be rephrased "that which is not 'explicitly' forbidden is allowed" rather than "specifically".
I have no problem with that change.
Ec
Which is a distinction without a difference.
Perhaps you need to go back over the difference between malum prohibitum and malum in se, and why your formulation doesn't work very well in light of that difference.