Mario Cuomo Quotes

Historically, both religious and secular laws originate from the same source

At first, laws evolved out of religious doctrines. It followed that they were recognized only when advantageous to those who practiced the same religion and who appeared equals under the protection of the same gods. For the members of all other cults, there was neither law nor mercy.

The Church has never changed its teaching on the sanctity of human life - it didn't make up a rule for the convenience of a particular time like a rule at a country club as the Governor would have us believe.

The commandment 'Thou shalt not kill' does not say it's O.K. to kill some people and not others.

Statutes against Fundamental Morality are void

What is considered sinful in one of the great religions to which citizens belong isn't necessarily sinful in the others. Criminal law therefore cannot be based on the notion of sin …

All human beings are intrinsically valuable, and the intentional taking of human life by private persons is always wrong.

It is better that Ten Suspected Witches should escape, than that one Innocent Person should be condemned.

Islam never allows a Muslim to kill the innocent and the helpless.

It is better to risk sparing a guilty person than to condemn an innocent one.

… human life and limb are a very special possession given by God to man and that no one has the right to take that away, in any cause, however just...

The criminal law tries to define moral standards.

[We] relegate to the Moslem and Judaic religious authorities all matters relating to personal ethics, inheritance, and religious practices, leaving other civil and penal matters to the courts presided over by professional magistrates.

To declare that in the administration of criminal law the end justifies the means -- to declare that the Government may commit crimes in order to secure conviction of a private criminal -- would bring terrible retribution.

In nearly every religion I am aware of, there is a variation of the golden rule. And even for the non-religious, it is a tenet of people who believe in humanistic principles.

It is often said by religious people that without its framework, there is no sense of right or wrong. My view is that religion comes after ethics.

I think the most important idea is to remember that there have been times throughout American history where what is right is not the same as what is legal.

If you condemn someone who has committed a crime to be tortured, that would be unconstitutional.

Abortion is wrong. I think everyone knows that, which is why abortion activists are so angry all the time. It's a bit like when you catch someone out in a lie, and they get really mad at you really quickly, and you can't work out why until later. It's guilt.

Judges cannot - nor should they try to - align our legal system with the Church's moral teaching whenever the two diverge. They should, however, conform their own behavior to the Church's standard.

I would never impose my own personal convictions upon the law.

I think life is too sacred to ever take it in any circumstances, even for the cure of a disease or something like that.

The great joy of being a prosecutor is that you don't take whatever case walks in the door. You evaluate the case; you make your best judgement. You only go forward if you believe that the defendant is guilty.

Faith properly informs the religious lawyer or judge, and morality is not in tension with fidelity to the law.

No argument for abortion survives scientific, philosophical, or theological scrutiny.