When I read the comments on the news report video on the raiding of Moksha spa in Kochi, which prompted me to make this note, a Commentary on the Indian Constitution and Penal Code, I saw some people say in response to those who said “he who is without sin may cast the first stone,” that they live like good people. But as far as I’m concerned, their minds are underdeveloped and dangerous.
A really good person would not care about forcing their values on to others. If two people had sex, and consensually so, in what way would that affect another person?
There is often the case brought up, about those who have sex with animals, who can’t speak. I’ve seen this being brought up by Muslims as a reason to have an objective moral framework, while I don’t see why the generally animistic Indians won’t do this too. My opinion here is that, unless they are otherwise supporters of animals, then they have no business dealing in this area. There are actual animal loving people in India who may be enraged by such actions, and a simple presence among them is enough to actually have your mind changed enough to not want to do such things. However, if you are someone who consumes animal meat and or or, someone who usually does not care about or dislikes animals, if you are not judging a human because an animal is hurt. You are judging the human for being sub-standard or for your aesthetics.
That is, the bigger reason most of these people judge others is due to their aesthetics, based on their personal values. So this judgement is an exertion of their egos on to others under the label of objective morality. This alone makes them the worst kind of people. Crimes like rape is simply an extreme case of what is the same thing.
Therefore, those who condemn others on “aesthetic” moral grounds are the highest among the evil ones.