In what country? — tim wood

Please read this:

Gestational Limits: 43 states prohibit abortions after a specified point in pregnancy, with some exceptions provided. The allowable circumstances are generally when an abortion is necessary to protect the patient's life or health.

-- Guttmacher Institute, An Overview of Abortion Laws

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that Germany lacked society during WWII times? What did they instead have during this time period? — javra

No. This is not what I'm saying at all. You cited Nazi as an example. I said it's not a society.

Or perhaps that people often use their emotions or their personal sense of "what feels right" or even just feels good, more so than what (they know?) logically is best, ie. smoking cigarettes or drinking regularly? — Outlander

"Outrage" is the term. "Outcry" is another. When the majority of the population have expressed an outrage or outcry, they represent the whole of their society. And the society acts to remedy this public outcry by means of creating a law.
Pointy finials killing wild life when they try to jump over the fence? There's a law now
banning pointy finials around your property.
Second hand smoke more poisonous than smoke? There's a law now banning smoking in common use areas.

You are conflating society with culture. Culture is language, tradition, religion, shared experience, etc. Society is glued together by laws. — James Riley

No I'm not. Unless you mean humans are automatons glued together by laws. Apply culture to these automatons and you get society.

How do you define society, exactly? I'm myself thinking of the typical dictionary senses when I use the term. — javra

Loosely, a population or a group of people with structured or ordered existence bound by morality (whether religious or secular or both). Structured in the sense that they perform economic, educational, and social activities.

it means nothing. Laws change, cultures change, societies change. — James Riley

It means the whole world. Look what happened to Detroit, Michigan.

That military arrangement or whatnot was democratically voted into power (this by the majority of the people). So your argument doesn't hold. — javra

I'd like to take a moment to say that, I did cover my ass when I said in my OP that there's an unwritten format adopted by the population. Did the German society die, or the Nazi party died?

A society. — javra

It was a military arrangement, not by the majority of the people, but by the Nazis. So, no it wasn't a society.

you forget that "unwritten format" must be written. Otherwise, it's not worth the paper it's not written on. — James Riley

No society had written a format, like a software program, where it mapped everything according to its needs and wants.

Nazis were law-abiding citizens within their own society, but their society's laws were often criminal … and violations of these criminal laws moral. — javra

The question is, Did the Nazis have a society or something else?

According to whom? — tim wood

According to the penal code, which is designed to protect society.

And society does not have a right to defend itself from nonconformity, especially when society has a Bill of Rights protecting minorities from the tyranny of a majority. — James Riley

And yet, the list of illegal activities is long.

Only if they can't avoid it. — 180 Proof

Who are they? And if they can't avoid it? What does it mean?

How come when @Wayfarer quoted me, I didn't get a notification? I just discovered that he responded to my post 5 hours ago.

This was hoped to be 'the atom' - the changeless point-particles that are the irreducible constituents of the Universe. But, alas.... — Wayfarer

And yes, they were thinking about something like an atom. Indivisible.

Nobody. — 180 Proof

So nobody deserves a punishment?

Nobody deserves anything — 180 Proof

Even criminals who committed heinous crimes?

Reality on the other hand should have something unchangeable, from which we can derive a set of rules. — Mersi

That's why right from the start, the ancient philosophers had lain down rules on talking about the real. Strip it down to bare minimum -- remove complex or composition of the real. After you've reduced it to "stuff" -- in the process called reductionism -- you get the most fundamental block of reality which is unchanging and indivisible.

Or, have we learned that (being human), and looking at our past history of trying to establish colonies, can we justify the effort of trying to establish a colony anywhere in space? — Don Wade

First of all, I don't think you can establish a colony on Mars. Colony is a political and economic move done by a government under one nation. If Mars could be "colonized", all nations should have an equal shot at it. So the entire Earth colonizing Mars.

When you say "our past history", did you have a specific country in mind?

I ask: Under which circumstance could objective reality remain inaccessible to us?
What fundamental properties (or flaws) must we accuse of our cognitive faculties to justify this assumption? — Mersi

The fundamental property that our cognitive faculties have is that we cannot look at an object, for example, without the meaning attached to it. We can't have a blank slate and perception at the same time. It's one or the other. We can't look at a chair without any understanding, whatsoever, what that object is, and even that it is an object.