The way this continues to fly right over your head would be astonishing if it wasn't so predictable at this point.
I don't understand the idea that our moral standards should be established by the worst actions of the worst people. But that seems to be what you are arguing in favor of. "Bad people exist and do bad things, and therefore anything and everything is justified". This kind of barbarism has been condemned, pretty universally, in just about every human society on the planet. Moral anarchy is a terrible idea if the goal is to have a functioning human community. That's why this kind of moral anarchy is condemned, from the Code of Hammurabi to the Torah in the Old Testament. "An eye for an eye" is a stricture against this kind of moral anarchy--of anything goes retributive actions. If you kill my brother, I can't just go murder you and your whole family: there are processes, laws, rules--going through appropriate channels to administer justice for the purpose of setting the situation to rights. A government that is supposed to be of a free and just people ought to conduct itself to a higher standard than mere barbarism.
