"I would uphold the law if for no other reason but to protect myself"

Thomas More’s assertion, “I would uphold the law if for no other reason but to protect myself,” speaks to the essential relationship between individual liberty and the rule of law. At its core, the statement acknowledges that the law serves as a barrier between people and tyranny, both the tyranny of others and of those in power. By upholding the law, regardless of personal sentiments, one ensures that due process, rights, and justice are safeguarded not just for oneself, but for all. The personal motivation, self-protection, points to a deeper universal truth: society’s stability and individual security depend upon adherence to shared legal frameworks.

More’s perspective is pragmatic. Popular depictions of him show a man deeply concerned with matters of conscience, yet here, he does not appeal to ideals but to practical necessity. Even those unconvinced by the moral value of law would be wise, he argues, to support it for their own safety. Without the law, no one is safe from arbitrary punishment or the whims of others; setting aside the law for a single expediency threatens everyone with vulnerability. Each time the law is violated or circumvented, the precedent erodes legal protections available to all, including those who might support such actions in the moment.

Implicit in More’s words is a warning against pursuing justice or personal interest outside the bounds of the law, even when the law feels inconvenient or obstructive. The law operates impartially, serving as a check against power and as a shield for the powerless. To undermine it, even for noble reasons, is to invite disorder and expose oneself to unpredictable dangers. Therefore, even in moments of personal trial or disagreement, upholding the law remains an act of enlightened self-preservation in which individual and communal interests align. Through this lens, More advocates not blind obedience, but a recognition of the law’s role as the safeguard of freedom.