Btw, when I said ''locals'', I actually meant ''locales''. I have edited my earlier post, but not many would re-read it
so I mentioned it here to, though it is a matter of little import.
Wrong or right can only be determined on an individual basis by the moral axioms held by said individual. Some things
though, can more or less be treated as though they were generally or objectively morally wrong or right since the
percentage of the majority is sufficiently close to 100% that we can approximate it to actually being 100%. However,
when it comes to murder, many believe it to be morally wrong to kill for ANY reason whereas many instead have killing
being wrong or right depending on the circumstances, motivations,e.t.c.
The latter belief seems to me to be more constructive and reasonable, but axioms by definition have no proof so... Even
so, what is ''good'' (constructive) is once again set by axioms.
What I suspect is the case though, is that once many of those who think that killing is ALWAYS morally wrong will
re-evaluate that notion after thinking it through (or having it's randomness demonstrated to them).
Many who say this will probably change mind once I pose things to them such as killing in self-defense or killing a few
to save many from death (for example).
For those who assume to much, that is not to say that I consider the murder in this topic to be justifiable, though
there may be those with odd, arbitrary and perhaps rarely held axioms that may think it is justifiable.
It seems to me that if the people who committed this murder rationally thought it out they see that their actions were
either evil or stupid. They may value tradition but if they weighed it up against how morally wrong they consider murder
to be, they would probably see this though it remains possible that via their axioms they were justified in murdering
this couple.
Regardless, one does not act and condemn according to ohters axioms.
Personally, optimizing the greatest good (not moral good, just ''good'' things in general... happiness basically) seems
the wisest and most sensible route to me. To that effect, these people should be punished greatly. Their punishment
should indicate that such stupidity will no longer be accepted and that others had better think things through before so
trivially ending human life. Basically, uncontrolled violence is generally not in the interest of the greater good
(though a little violence here and there can definitely be a good and delicious thing depending on the circumstances).