If something happens, it is because it is deemed by nature—the consequences of actions, of events. Murder is wrong because we take away the life of someone destined to live. But if we generalize this idea to everything in life, then doctors, surgeons... they too go against the laws of nature, don't you think? They fix something that wasn’t supposed to be fixed. They cure someone that was deemed by nature to be ill. Reviving and sustaining life is on the opposite spectrum of taking a life, but they both go against the laws of nature, right?
In that sense, straying from the path of naturally fated occurrences can't be wrong all the time. Well, at least that’s what we think—because we make exceptions.
Don’t get me wrong—if I or anyone I loved was about to die, I’d want them to somehow survive... not perish. But that’s just the desire of our human mind. We grow attached to the people around us, love them, and we can’t bear to lose them. So if there was a way to prolong their existence, then we will collectively agree that it is right—because our yearning, love, and grief justify the action of saving them.
But we can’t deny that that does, in a way, go against what nature had in store. And yet, murder too goes against the normal, natural way of events—and still, that is considered wrong.
I’d say both, in a sense, do indeed break away from the course of nature. But it is the perceptions of humanity that justify the righteousness of our actions.
