Do you think it is okay not to follow a law based on your moral grounds?

In our culture, people are so accustomed to the idea of every law having a lawmaker, every rule having an enforcer, every institution having someone in authority, and so forth, that the thought of something being otherwise has the ring of chaos to it. As a result, when one lives one’s life without reference to some ultimate authority in regard to morals, one’s values and aspirations are thought to be arbitrary. Furthermore, it is often argued that, if everyone tried to live in such a fashion, no agreement on morals would be possible and there would be no way to adjudicate disputes between people, no defense of a particular moral stand being possible in the absence of some absolute point of reference.

Explanation:hope this helps!!!

well i depends on how the moral grounds of a persons perspective

but overall no i don't

Explanation: law in order u can still be held agenst your action even if you

think your helping or it's IE; [not right]

acts of terrorism occur globally. the united nations global counter-terrorism strategy was created in order to build adequate systems of support and solidarity with victims of terrorism. here´s a summary of the proposed key themes: the importance of giving victims a face and a voice; protecting their dignity; giving victims legal status and defending their legal rights; providing victims with medical, psycho-social and financial support; building solidarity with victims; improving media coverage of victims; and focusing on the link between victims and counter-terrorism efforts more generally.

answer; role- taking;