Theos-Talk Archives (February 2003 Message tt00360)

Hi Steve,

As you perhaps know, the below argument is precisely why the Dutch 
condone soft-drug use, and have a legalized abortion-practice. 

Katinka
> Most people would agree that human sacrifice should be interdicted 
as 
> a form of religious worship, especially if the person being 
persuaded 
> happens to be the human some devotee wants to sacrifice. That is 
the 
> basis for interdicting what some see as terrorism and others see as 
> their path to paradise. The question is at what point should one 
> merely persuade by reasoned argument and at what point should 
> reasoned arfument lead to legal action. The standard, I would 
think, 
> is a Utilitarian one, i.e., the greatest good for the greatest 
> uumber. Paradoxically, using that argument one would have to argue 
> that it is NOT the proper function of the state to criminalize or 
> restrict abortions, since it is impossible to prevent abortions and 
> criminalizing it results in more evil than legalizing it. In the 
> case of animal slaughter an additional question arises, i.e., 
whether 
> sentient beings who are not human should be included in "the 
greatest 
> number" or if it is OK to do with them as we wish. The German law 
> as I understand it merely tries to eliminate cruelty as a part of 
the 
> act of slaughter and not the slaughter itself. A similar issue 
> arises with regard t0m animal farming which includes in some cases 
> cruel and unnecessary practices.