Have Faith

Have faith that the Law is inherently benevolent because as much as it is cruel, it is inherently benevolent. That's my faith

The way of Culture v.03b

Culture is not always bad but when it changed it's culture, for me this is a traitor. When people used law to go against humanity, the case could be made against it based on the law. It might be in the form of constitution or the basic law that's fundamental of every other laws. Also when its "lawful" to be evil, such as slavery, such is obvious and again the case could be made against it.

When cultures clashed, they went like wind and could form tornadoes. If the culture was eating chicken and suddenly it turned to cannibalism it was the culture because it were the people. Yes those who still ate chicken kept the previous culture, but the very people who were, then became, were the very people of the "new culture" therefore carried with them were our faiths. 

Without Law reliance on Culture is relying on a traitor. The heart of people is none of our businesses (not property of others)

Order to address Concerns

 A centralized government doesn't have to create laws all the time. They could make public a document of order to address concerns that should be followed up by the regional administrators.

Example:

- Regional administrators must create rules that address following concerns:

Concern 1. In order to strengthen the institution of marriage, a spouse should be able to receive government help in punishing and seek damages from the other spouse in the case of promiscuity.

And then the regional administrators would act in the wisdom of their own contexts, the public could review and raise criticism or endorsements of the approach used by the government and experts could also professionally audit and review orders issued by the regional administrators. 

Concern 2. To care so that irresponsible members of the public couldn't raise cases randomly and abuse this power. 

Concern 3. To care that there are special cases or traditional cultures that would vary the definition of promiscuity. Governments need to preserve such definitions without allowing ways to bypass the order. 

Concern 4. That there's a clear expected punishment in respect.

Concern 5. To protect children from predators

Concern 5a. To be careful of the definition of children and the definition of child predators. Shouldn't make innocent people liable to be subject of the ruling

Concern 5b. To allow for prompt protection, prevent red tapes on this matter

Concern 5c. While giving access to enforcement for social media cases, to care so that the quality of privacy online wouldn't be reduced or damaged, while still be able to pierce through predators' veils of anonymity.

etc