Why? Because you say so?
Why should we punish people who murder when their moral sense is simply the biproduct of random evolutionary processes. We don't punish rocks that slide down hillsides and take out busloads of children. Under what basis then do we then punish the man who deliberatley runs a busload of children off a cliff? His sense of morality is nothing more than chemical reactions driven by a purposeless mechanism of random change through time.
You are hard-wired to divide the world into the inanimate and the intentional. You have constructed a post-hoc rationalization of the categories, in terms of your particular religion; but long before you went to Sunday school, you were distinguishing between people and things. And of course, people all over the world, regardless of religion or lack of same, make the distinction. Now you attribute this distinction to your religious outlook; but of course it's nothing to do with religion. If tomorrow you decided you were an atheist, you wouldn't start treating people as rocks.
I guess so.
And who are you to disagree with me?
Where does your moral authority come from? General consensus? Genetic changes? ... Dietary Supplements?
On what basis were the actions of Hitler wrong? Because you didn't like them?