The more interesting and relevant question is whether it is right or wrong. The answer to that question is not automatically the same as lawful/unlawful. Even in a democracy.
The more interesting and relevant question is whether it is right or wrong. The answer to that question is not automatically the same as lawful/unlawful. Even in a democracy.
There is a huge political context around this trial, and I believe that the fact that my parent post was arguing that we should discuss about morality, not just legality, is a way to introduce this context into the evaluation of the trial to assess - and condemn - the result. I think this is mis characterizing the quality of the trial itself. Plenty of people are decrying the trial result because they want independence, which to me is intellectually dishonest. I was thus arguing that the trial itself was right, responding to a direct ask to consider right vs wrong.