Final answer:
Avoiding positive repugnancy in legal statutes involves ensuring that laws are not in direct conflict with constitutional principles, such as the prohibition of bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and laws violating freedom of speech or religion. This maintains a balance between government power and individual rights, which is essential for maintaining public confidence in the government.
Step-by-step explanation:
The student's question pertains to the concept of avoiding positive repugnancy in legal statutes, which relates to constitutional law. This involves understanding how general and specific statutes need to be interpreted and applied without causing direct conflict or contradiction with constitutional principles. The principle of legality ensures that no one can be punished under a law that is not clearly defined and prohibits laws that are unfairly targeted at specific individuals or groups (known as bills of attainder), retroactive laws (ex post facto laws), or laws violating contract rights.
Moreover, the Constitution also details protections such as the freedom of speech, where the government is usually unable to execute prior restraint and prohibit publications without due process. The ban on prior restraint was reinforced by the Supreme Court, protecting various forms of expression. These constitutional safeguards extend to maintaining a balance between governmental power and individual rights, thereby ensuring that public confidence in the government is preserved.
Thus, in the legal context, avoiding positive repugnancy means enacting and enforcing laws in harmony with these foundational guarantees, including freedom of religion and the prohibition of unconstitutional punitive legislation, to maintain the rule of law and the beneficent ends of government institutions.