When the phrase “respect for individuals” is trotted out by contemporary clerics, it is a magical incantation to get around laws and counter arguments. Don’t like capital punishment? Respect for the condemned murderer should cause us to ban it. Engaged in a just war? You only think your cause is just, while respect for individuals says otherwise. Believe that the immigration laws of your country should be enforced? Respect for individuals says no. Think that the welfare state is too big? Respect for individuals says that you ain’t seen nothing yet.
The shell game going on here, is that when the phrase is employed, other groups are usually told to go pound sand. In the case of illegal aliens it is everyone harmed by illegal aliens. In regard to the death penalty it is everyone who has a family member murdered. In regard to a just war, it is everyone who will bear the consequences of “give peace a chance”. In reference to welfare states it is all who recall the admonition of Saint Paul: “Those who will not work should not eat.”
It is a verbal sleight of hand, usually dishonest in its formulation. It is the speech equivalent of kicking over a chess board in order to “win”. It is an irrelevant ad hominen argument which presupposes at the outset that counter arguments have no validity and only bad people raise them. Such a mode of debate is worthy only of scoundrels and certainly not of the Vicar of Christ.
never any criticism of rulers, governments and conditions persons are (supposedly) escaping from….. always condemnation of individuals and governments who do not accept that invasion.