moose eater
Well-known member
We could argue the same at rapists and murderers' trials, no?
What makes delivery of suitable justice acceptable in courts that often get facts or details wrong, but countries or people striking back at oppressors who've committed far greater crimes a matter of taboo hate?
A matter of decorum, or the pretense of balance and equity?
Seems a bit inconsistent to me.
What makes delivery of suitable justice acceptable in courts that often get facts or details wrong, but countries or people striking back at oppressors who've committed far greater crimes a matter of taboo hate?
A matter of decorum, or the pretense of balance and equity?
Seems a bit inconsistent to me.