Quote:
|
Originally Posted by innerSpaceman
scaeagles - if child abuse and murder were as widespread as illegal immigration, drug use and prostitution, I would be in favor of those things being legal as well. If tens of millions of people in a particular society are murderers, there is no sense in providing that society with legal protection from murder. And legal protection wouldn't work. You cannot eliminate anything that tens of millions of people do ... and yes, you heard me right, you shouldn't bother trying.
When tens of millions do it, it's no longer immoral. If murder is the order of the day in Freedonia, then Freedonia's morals allow for homocide.
|
Interesting.
I am really not trying to be ridiculous here, but I don't think these are far from thinking murder would be acceptable - meaning that preventing it should not be a focus of society - if the majority of the population was doing it.
Does this mean that should you have lived in the confederate states in the early 1800s you would have wanted to keep slavery legal? Or that no should bother trying to eliminate it?
If you lived in Rwanda, would you think genocide is acceptable because such a huge portion of the populace participates in it? Or that it is pointless to try to stop it?
If you lived in Germany, would the extermination of the Jews have been acceptable?