Reminds me of this quote:
> “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”
There are many laws which are unjust, what is right and what is legal does not always align. Maybe it was illegal. But should it really be?
To me what this person did looked about as illegal as someone breaking an entry into a burning house to aid the people inside.
What is considered right highly varies by country and culture, when you say "right" to what country/culture do you refer to?
> To me what this person did looked about as illegal as someone breaking an entry into a burning house to aid the people inside.
I am not commenting on the moral side of this persons actions, only the legal side.
But this is a false sense of neutrality and objectivity. Asking about the legality of aiding humans cannot be done without considering the moral side of the law and the moral side of the actions. Especially since the law itself has a moral component.
False according to what/who? For the sake of a good discussion it would be good if you gave some sources. Ie my question to you from a comment above
At no point I said that someone was wrong because they think differently, no need to fight windmills