CONTEST RESULTS:
Thanks to everyone who participated. Declaring the winner is strictly my prerogative and in addition to be arbitrary and capricious, my decision is utterly lacking in any rational basis.
Winner: "Legal ethics is to actual ethics as gold is to the golden rule," submitted by PLR. It has enough cynicism to be tongue in cheek or brutally accurate, depending upon your view. It alludes to the mercenary aspect of legal ethics rules, but also can be read more sympathetically as suggesting that legal ethics deals with reality and not with the meta-physical. If PLR will shoot me an email, I will be glad to send along the prize. (You might want to take a closer look at that Amazon link to see if you still want to claim the prize.)
Runner-up: What can I say about the insightful and indefatigable Patrick O'Donnell? We're always glad to see his comments. My only problem with his entries was that they were so substantive and so numerous that I had to research some of them to grasp them.
Honorable Mention: John Bickers for "legal ethics is to actual ethics as legal tender is to actual tenderness." Like the winning entry, this one plays off the monetary against the human.
****************
C'mon readers, we can do better than that. Post your entries in the comments and the winner (selected solely in my discretion) will get a copy of this book. We are looking for entries that begin "legal ethics is to real ethics as . . . ."
UPDATE: I realize that I slightly altered the tone of the comparison. Volokh's original was "legal ethics is to actual ethics . . . ." I got that correct in the title of this post, but then used the formula, "legal ethics is to real ethics . . . . " So in your submissions, you can use "actual" or "real" or just drop the adjectives and go with "legal ethics is to ethics . . . . "
UPDATE 2: The contest is almost over, but I will give people through Saturday to add suggestions.
(Nod to Sasha Volokh's comment in Paul Cassell's post, via Althouse)