Conflicting Morals in a Society

One of the passages in Leviathan that really stuck out to me was on the right hand column of page 229 and goes as follows: 

"Another doctrine repugnant to civil society, is, that whatsoever a man does against his conscience, is sin; and it dependeth on the presumption of making himself judge of good and evil. For a man's conscience, and his judgement is the same thing; and as the judgement, so also the conscience may be erroneous. therefore, though he that is subject to no civil law, sinneth in all he does against his conscience, because he has no other rule to follow but his own reason; yet it is not so with him that lives in a commonwealth; because the law is the public conscience, by which he hath undertaken to be guided" (229).

It is very true today that when we enter into a society, country, or state, we are not only subject to our own moral compasses and value but also to the overall value of greater society which are sometimes at odds with our own. I think this reality is one of the greatest causes of conflict not only between different populations but also inside of them. One of the first examples that comes to mind is the issue of abortion and the heated debate on if it should be legal or not. Other examples could be marijuana legalization, mentioning God in the pledge of allegiance said in schools, and the list goes on. 

Its easy to say that people should simply respect the values of others and live their own life in accordance with heir own opinions (ie if you are morally opposed to abortion, don't get an abortion,) however, I think that is an oversimplified solution since it discounts the reality that living in a society where opinions that are at direct odds with your own can be extremely uncomfortable and as a result conflict usually arises in the form of protest, legislation, and on occasion violence. 

Ultimately I think this sort of moral conflict within a society is healthy and leads to the stability that Hobbs seeks. If the world consisted of societies made up of people who completely agreed on all aspects of an issue without any value in counterargument, it would create much more violence and separation between societies when they disagreed with each other (but not within themselves). 

It is impossible to take into account and accommodate every member of society's conscience when creating laws, especially laws that broach topics where morality comes into play. While Hobbs is right in saying that in order to be a member of a commonwealth people are therefore obligated to obey the rules, the moral debate that follows these decisions is ultimately healthy for the stability of society at large.