:
|
The point is that if you open the door to the extermination of one group, that could open doors to others. In a perfect world, we would be able to easily tell the bad ones apart from the good ones and give them proper rehabilitation, but we don't. The best we have is the beaurocrasy to try and not leave anything unchecked and hope that the further innovations, technological, political, and philisophical, keep propelling humanity to a better place.
|
Gabe, shame. I figured you were smarter than to pull out the "perfect world" argument, as there is nothing more subjective than the concept of a utopia.
In general, the idea of a perfect world is one without disease or murder. But unless we did have limited breeding, or some form of culling (ala
Logan's Run), we would become incredibly overpopulated without nature's ability to pick off those of us who are not meant for survival. I am by no means a humanist, and I think the idea that humans are above nature because of our technological prowess is sick.