I don't think I have said that?! Anyway, I think you confused with the term "us" used in my sentence. It really just mean "us", as in you and me only, and not the "us", as in the community as a whole.So then, when whoever wrote the law dies, then the law is out the window?Since the rules are not set by us, our interpretation is
If you were a psychopath, indeed you would kill without remorse, because in your view, you are not doing anything wrong. Society judges you in the perceived "majority view" of what is right and wrong. However, this view may change with time, information available, as well as who is in power.Wow, I suppose if I were a psychopath I'd go on a killing spree and take some peoples homes from them know that I know that the old laws against such things don't apply anymore.
In the current discussion of "war crimes", I see a lot of disagreement arising from the issue such as: what is and what is not self-defence, or who is using or not using human shield.... which immediately brings me back to my original statement that "interpretation" is everything.
I am sure that some would argue that torture is ok if it may keep America safe (especially straight after an terrorist attack when the emotions/pains are high), while there must be an equally large section of the community who would disagree. So WHO is right?
Sometimes, ppl do not just argue about the actions, but also intention as you would be well aware. That's what I was trying to point out... ie. not black/white whether something is definitely correct or wrong. Unless you forego the discussion on intention/motive, then perhaps it would be more clear cut.