Why? Serious question. The legal code is ultimately concerned only with itself, not reality.
If this were the case why was passing same sex marriage such a fiasco? Why does a Supreme Court judge defer to biologists when asked what a woman is? No no, legal terms are based in reality; it’s the perversion of the legal system and LANGUAGE that’s really letting down the team at the moment. If legal terms are not based in reality, then a matter can be disputed.
It forms a logical, self-consistent system which only has to agree with itself. If it doesn’t fit reality, then just redefine a few words so it does. After all, why not? The word “bee” in the legal code does not have to correspond with the word “bee” as it is commonly used in the English language, just as in physics the word “force” does not have to correspond with the word “force” as it is commonly used in the English language.
In fact, it cannot do so, if physics is to work as a science.
If legal language isn’t going to fit reality, then what’s the point of it? Just because some professionals are more adept at gaming the legal code and how it corresponds to reality, does not mean that is how it is meant to function….sorry, basically just repeated myself, but it bears repeating..
Regarding the word “force”; well, it has multiple meanings but I’m failing to see your point? It’s always about context; and in the context of a legal setting, little differences matter. That’s why arguments are characterized as being ‘watertight’ or weak. Wanna protect bees? Lets put in the effort so some resource giant won’t pick it apart
The legal code appears to be written in English, but it fact it actually isn’t. It’s written in Legalese. It must therefore be interpreted. This is why we have lawyers and judges. Lol.
Sure, you can interpret something like the Constitution now that everyone’s dead
Interpretation is needed when the original meaning of something is lost or to see how legislation can or should be applied in a case.
However, a bee is still very much a bee - it ain’t a fish - and I’m surprised at the laziness of this legislative process.
Really? How so?
Just because something hasn’t been challenged doesn’t mean it can’t be. But if we can’t be bothered writing up correct environmental legislation to reflect the definition of a bee, I hold out little hope that we can graduate to giving Corporations a run for their money