Originally Posted by
Trollkiller
True but to be a valid defense you also have to not know it was wrong by a reasonable person's standards.
That is why some were found guilty an Nuremburg. The justices decided that any reasonable person would know that killing without just cause is wrong.
But would a reasonable person not have killed a Jew if they knew they would be killed instead?
Hate to say it, but reasonableness is relative to some degree. I agree that killing someone just because is wrong, but at the same time, considering how messed up Germany was at the time and if it was an "either me or them" type of deal, what would a reasonable person do?