Comment: Yes!

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Crime against Humanity (see in situ)


It does make it less 'criminal'. It is still evil, morally wrong and against God's commandments. But not a crime, if it does not break the law.

I have no issue with your meaning, Bear, only with the linguistics you are using. I think that phrases like that are imprecise and inaccurate, and so unhelpful. For instance it could mean:

a) Illegal according to a state, but legal according to some other, natural law (which is subjective and often depends on who is using the term),
b) Legal according to a state, but illegal according to other law.

'Crime against humanity' is a journalistic phrase that does not usually refer to 'an' actual crime. Something may be a 'crime against humanity' without being a crime. If for instance the laws in that state are evil. Do you see the linguistic distinction between law and morality?

Terms like 'legal murder' or 'legal theft' are more accurate. Because 'murder' and 'theft' have clearly understood conceptual meanings distinct from their legal prohibition. Whereas crime is generally defined as being what is prohibited by law.


Obedience to God is resistance to tyrants.