You say that as if it was some law written in stone, whereas it's nothing more than a thought experiment by an influential philosopher (which, in itself, is far from an absolute authority wrt how humans should behave).
> a thought experiment by an influential philosopher
Plus, this particular philosopher would very likely display a lot of intolerance against those proposing its usage so generously. And he would bite himself in the arse for even stating it because of course people misunderstand the meaning.
True, but every system needs some exception handling. The US Constitution is a long-running system but contains several broad exceptions relating to war because that's an existential problem.
Right. I think of the exception handling layer as the human part of a trial that is supposed to look at the spirit of the laws rather than the textual interpretation of them, but in practice it's far from perfect, I know.
You say that as if it was some law written in stone, whereas it's nothing more than a thought experiment by an influential philosopher (which, in itself, is far from an absolute authority wrt how humans should behave).