re: #250 LudwigVanQuixote

You didn’t just say it was just. You said it was lawful and just.

And I’m sorry, but all law may be a compromise, but it’s still what defines what is ‘lawful’.

If you say that the killing is just, I have no problem with it. But if you claim it’s lawful, you need to be able to show the law.

And that is not sophistry. You cannot open a semantic argument and then reject further semantics.