Rath said:
The situation your above question proposed? You mean that they can do whatever they want to a group of people as long as its a majority? What I was pointing out is that it would only be acceptable if they were not demonstatably a person (and hence don't automatically qualify for human rights), the only other situation I can think of where somebody is not demonstatably a person is in the case of being either brain dead or in a permanent vegatative state. Hence the subject you brought up, slavery, is not acceptable because the slaves were demonstatably people with all the things that make people people.
|
But I do not think the slave owners (in that example) were unsure of their own position; they too felt quite justified. Similarily, many people on both sides of the issue of abortion today feel that their positions are quite demonstratable or obvious. Demonstrability is too subjective a term to use to determine this, I think.
Okami
To lavish praise upon this title, the assumption of a common plateau between player and game must be made. I won't open my unworthy mouth.







