I wasn't "bringing religion into it" (other than in a very tangential way, by quoting a "legendary" figure -- I'm not personally religious). However, an "eye for an eye" clearly makes no distinction based on ego-centric "perspective". Under Roman law, the plaintiff in what we would now call a criminal trial was the injured party. If you murdered someone with no close relatives, there would be no "plaintiff", and thus no trial. Today, the plaintiff in criminal trials is the State (in the U.S., the "Crown" in the U.K.). WE have correctly determined that breaking the law is an offense against The State (which made the laws in the first place). Therefore a "perspective" based on the personal harm done to the victim SHOULD have no bearing on the prosecution of the criminal.



Reply With Quote


