Recently, I saw something that was quite upsetting. A legal expert like Luo Xiang, a criminal law professor at China University of Political Science and Law, was forced to delete posts under the pressure of online public opinion. The underlying issues behind this are truly profound.

I'm thinking, if even such legal professionals retreat in the face of online abuse, then those who are most fiercely condemning and moral judging online are actually the ones who end up as the ultimate victims. Why do I say that? Because once legal professionals stop their legal education work, the authority of the law is undermined, and the first to suffer is the rule of law in society.

Many people confuse morality and law. In fact, within the legal framework, these two concepts have clear boundaries. The law has a technical term called public order and good customs, which is what we often refer to as the moral bottom line of society. But the problem is, legal judgments cannot rely solely on morality; they must also consider specific circumstances.

For example, in a murder case, the judge must first distinguish between intent and negligence, which are independent legal elements. Only then do they look at why the intent or negligence occurred; these are important references for sentencing. Even if the victim themselves violated public order and good customs, this can only be considered as a mitigating factor, not the entirety of moral judgment.

Historically, the case of Wu Song killing Ximen Qing was based on this logic in legal sentencing. But now, many people seem to want to use morality to coerce law, separating the two, which is actually a shallow understanding of law. The fact that Luo Xiang was forced to delete posts essentially reflects this issue — when the voices of legal professionals are suppressed, society loses its rational voice.