> must be destroyed I think that the article is not saying anything about ought-to-be matters. Just what-is observational statement. It's not that it 'must' b

> must be destroyed I think that the article is not saying anything about ought-to-be matters. Just what-is observational statement. It's not that it 'must' be, by some moral standard, be destroyed. It's that it would be destroyed by inevitable laws of objective reality, which, like gravity, do not take any moral stance.