I do, in fact, believe that there is rational basis for laws against cannibalism
What I would like, is for Humanae Vitae to declare his rational basis for them.
As far as I can tell, he thinks that some things should be outlawed for no other reason than personal opinion.
I think laws need to serve an objective purpose - defending the rights of the innocent for example.
IMO, the non-initiation of force and fraud rule is a very good yardstick, but is not enough by itself.
There is something lacking.
Something more is required to make it all work.
I think that the differences between Humanae Vitae, Kevin Curry, and I are about just what that something is.
There seems to be a huge difference in our philosophies at the epistemological level (basis of knowledge- reason, divine revelation,ect.).
That is what I am after now.
I am not as interested in the "should" as I am in the "why".
I'd be more than happy to explain my ethical system, but I'm busy today...I'll try to post it tomorrow. I'm also busy putting together a post that challenges evolution.