> Since there were far more people on the earthd uring "modern" history than there were in the past, this is hardly a relevant point. As a percentage of population killed, they've certainly done no better (or worse) than their religious predecessors.
The taking of a human life should NEVER be measured in percentages; by doing so you erroneously minimize the value of a single life.
Those who kill less people because they had less opportunity are still less loathsome than those who kill more. While it's possible they would've done more harm had they been able, it's impossible to measure -- accurately and objectively -- what might have been "if".
Slashdot Mirror
> Since there were far more people on the earthd uring "modern" history than there were in the past, this is hardly a relevant point. As a percentage of population killed, they've certainly done no better (or worse) than their religious predecessors. The taking of a human life should NEVER be measured in percentages; by doing so you erroneously minimize the value of a single life. Those who kill less people because they had less opportunity are still less loathsome than those who kill more. While it's possible they would've done more harm had they been able, it's impossible to measure -- accurately and objectively -- what might have been "if".