be illegal

also goes the other way:

not everything that is illegal by law has to be wrong. homosexuality was illegal too.

Legal. Ethical. Moral.

These are all different things, although they overlap in a Venn diagram of sorts. Ideally, you want everything in life to be all three, but that's not always possible.

The moderator has the legal right to censor. The moderator owes you nothing.

Funny, right?

But don't dare use this argument in favour of animal rights

I think that would depend on which animal rights
- The ones that we decided are going to live in a constant hell where they can barely move so we can have our yummy bacon
Please let's focus on animals when humans stop getting butchered.
- Abattior workers have a sky high rate of mental illness and subsequent domestic abuse/murder.
  You can kill two birds with one stone, so to speak
- Why can't we worry about both
- I've never understood this argument. Like, sure, priorities are important, but humanity can work towards more than one goal at a time.
- I'll stop murdering people when we achieve world peace

Yeah, I'm sure the Venezuelan fishermen who got blown up by Trump admin to smithereens were glad they got to participate in a "be illegal" movement.

“You even thinking about racism makes you a racist.” — the US Supreme Court, probably

My mom kinda has this mindset. She's tends to follow rules by the book with little to no questions asked. She'd probably turn further right if it weren't for my dad tempering her.

Some people are just Lawful-Neutral, to use the old DND alignment metaphor.
Personally I think it's one of the most frustrating world views. At least with evil I understand that they're getting something out of it.
- Hey now some of us aspire towards chaotic good or fuck even chaotic neutral. But I've got autism and C-PTSD, I don't like leaving my house so the best I can do is yell butchered Icelandic curses at bible thumpers.
- The "lawful neutral" mindset that you mentioned is about self-preservation. It's about keeping your head down and not making a ruckus, or else it's your head that will be on sight. But some people inherently believe in order, and prefer the stability it brings for not questioning the authority.

The Holocaust was not legal. Only in Germany if they ignore international laws.

So, in other words, yes it was legal, within the framework of a system who's authority is derived from the state that legalises it?
- No. Murder was illegal in nazi Germany. There simply was no rule of law.
  Formally, part of this was justified by a law that gave Hitler the power to make laws without parliament, without oversight, without regard for the constitution. Of course, that sort of thing is nonsense. People who went along with that made a choice. FWIW, all those generals who felt they had to obey Hitler's order according to their oath, they also had sworn an oath to the republic.
  This can only be understood if one remembers that Germany had been a republic for barely 15 years. A good chunk of the elites (not just rich people, but judges, bureaucrats, ... ) were indifferent or even hostile to democracy.
  The holocaust itself was not justified by anything. There was no law that made it legal to murder jewish people or anyone else.
- AFAIK it technically wasn't even legal in Nazi Germany. Some German officer was actually investigating these crimes (abuse of prisoners in the camps) until the Nazis dealt with him (can't remember his name though).
  Even then, there was no law that legalized the Holocaust afaik. The Nazis just did it with impunity, because who would stop them anyway?
- Yes
I believe that you're just pointing out a historical accuracy issue here, but it makes it sound like you think that if only Hitler had got international approval first then the Holocaust would have been moral. Hence your downvotes