Kifle wrote:Laws which are created through moral perspective are tyrannical and counterproductive to societal growth and sustainability. These laws should be removed.
Laws which are created through moral necessity are those which should stay -- because they are laws inherent in nature or created necessarily from society.
Corth/Kifle, how would you handle, using the above quotes, the following crime(?). Meaning, how would you defend/attack its legal existence.
If I walk in a mall with a loaded gun in my hand, I will be arrested.
Hopefully I'm making sense and you understand what I'm hoping you guys can do. Sorry, not finding the right words right now. It's not some trick question btw, but the answer might serve later for comparison.
P.S. As an aside, when making references to stem cell research, remember that the only issue is with human embryonic stem cell research, and the destruction of a human embryo/fetus. Adult stem cells, umbilical cord, amniotic fluid, etc. research is a-okay. The issue is with killing a human life in the name of progress...which is what some people want to set, a time on when human is human, etc. But just wanted to clarify the main terminology, sorry if it was obvious or whatnot.