Kant's Moral law VS Heteronomy? help!?

Question

Can some one please help me??

Answer 1

to me, Kants Moral law would come from within a person, they would view each act/concept in the terms of "could it be a universal law" , and they would have a duty to not act in ways that could not be universally acceptable under all circumstances,

heteronomy is the condition of being ruled by an outside force, whether human or divine, so one would follow the laws of the land, or the laws of God
for instance, killing someone who has wronged you
for Kant, one would have to state that as a maxim (principle)
"it is always ok to kill someone who has wronged you"
then you would have to apply that to all humans,
then you would have to "will", be willing for that condition to exist in the world, whether you acted on it or not
one couldnt /wouldnt will for it to be ok in all circumstances for someone to kill the person that wronged them, for you would have to reason that you might wrong someone oneday, or that different wrongs might not equal the need to kill

for heteronomy, you would decide your action or lack of action based on the local laws, and God commandment "thou shall not kill "

hope this helps