Your bring in the legal concept of 'reasonable person' into the debate. Well done. A 'reasonable person' is:

A phrase frequently used in tort and Criminal Law to denote a hypothetical person in society who exercises average care, skill, and judgment in conduct and who serves as a comparative standard for determining liability. (freedictionary.com)

So how would this standard be used when, over time, that comparative standard has diminished on an ethical and moral standard? When Spirit has highlighted the highest moral and ethical standard, then how come use the reasonable person standard instead?