Posted: 1/30/2012 11:07:52 PM EDT
|
“If killing were wrong just because it is causing death or the loss of life, then the same principle would apply with the same strength to pulling weeds out of a garden. If it is not immoral to weed a garden, then life as such cannot really be sacred, and killing as such cannot be morally wrong.”
Killing or Weeding? |
|
The killing of a non-sentient species cannot compare to that of a sentient species.
We routinely kill animals that have feeings, i.e. they are in pain, fear their own death (else they would not flee the hunter). Few people can deny that dogs and cats have feelings, feel pain, think at some level. yet it is legal (until recently) to slay them. We draw the line at killing beings with equal sentience, i.e. other humans. Even then, after the careful deliberation of a jury of one's peers and finding him guilty, it is legal to kill a person. And as far as killing gods goes.... that must be the ultimate sin, right? |
|
Quoted:
Killing a person is wrong because by doing so you deprive them of the rest of thier life. A life they have plans and aspirations for. At least this is what I learned in ethics class. In a nutshell. Edited to specify murder killing, not defense killing. Fuck em, this..... Lootie23 said "This. Pretty much the only reason I haven't thinned the heard around here. I don't want to go to prison. But some people need killing". The majority of people now a days are oxygen thieves, simply useless. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Killing a person is wrong because by doing so you deprive them of the rest of thier life. A life they have plans and aspirations for. At least this is what I learned in ethics class. In a nutshell. Edited to specify murder killing, not defense killing. Fuck em, this..... Lootie23 said "This. Pretty much the only reason I haven't thinned the heard around here. I don't want to go to prison. But some people need killing". The majority of people now a days are oxygen thieves, simply useless. Regardless of who you are or how you spend your time, there is surely someone on earth with an ideology that would deem you useless. I'm not saying that there are not many among us as Americans who would benefit from a kick in the pants. I'm just saying that what you deem worthy or not worthy of life is not valid. You state your argument in terms of available resources. "Because they breath" is not a good reason to kill someone. I see by your avatar that you have given a lot of thought to the subject. |
|
I'll take a shot at this: I believe the whole point of this life is to make choices. Choose good or evil, faith or not faith/fear. Really the only thing that we have is our agency. Everything else belongs to God. When you kill someone, you are taking away ALL of their choices. That person is no longer able to choose between good and evil or choose life for that matter. |
|
Quoted:
I'll take a shot at this: I believe the whole point of this life is to make choices. Choose good or evil, faith or not faith/fear. Really the only thing that we have is our agency. Everything else belongs to God. When you kill someone, you are taking away ALL of their choices. That person is no longer able to choose between good and evil or choose life for that matter. Well put. |
|
Wrong question. If I remember correctly, the commandment was originally "Thou shalt not murder" and there is a big difference between killing and murder. There are legitimate reasons to kill someone. Murder, or the unjustified killing of an innocent, is unjustifiable.
AFA weeds go - I have a lot of respect for the dandelion. I pull them out by their roots when they are still green and find them sprouting their fuzzy seeds a week later on the top of my compost heap. They are survivors of the highest order. |
|
Quoted: Wrong question. If I remember correctly, the commandment was originally "Thou shalt not murder" and there is a big difference between killing and murder. There are legitimate reasons to kill someone. Murder, or the unjustified killing of an innocent, is unjustifiable. AFA weeds go - I have a lot of respect for the dandelion. I pull them out by their roots when they are still green and find them sprouting their fuzzy seeds a week later on the top of my compost heap. They are survivors of the highest order. Not to start anything, but that isn't exactly correct. It was actually the other way around. The word that is commonly translated to "murder" in some bibles is a rather narrow interpretation of the root word. There is a book by a hebrew scholar titled, You Shall not Kill or You Shall not Murder?; The Assault on a Biblical Text. You might give it a look. It pretty much states that the translations began changing from "Kill" to "Murder" only recently.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Because it's illegal. This. Pretty much the only reason I haven't thinned the herd around here. I don't want to go to prison. But some people need killing. 1 John 3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him. How someone can have the love of Jesus Christ in them and want to take a life is beyond me, self defense is one thing but killing is another. Jesus saves. |
|
Killing does not always equal murder. The Hebrew for the commandment uses the word 'ratsach' which literally means 'to murder, a murderer, to dash to pieces". So it reads, "Thou shalt not murder"
Murder's definition includes 'malice' in the action of taking someone's life. The real issue with taking a human life or any life for that matter is forgiveness and restitution. There isn't any. You cannot ask the person in this life for their forgiveness nor can you restore what was taken. I will thank the animal for their sacrifice and thank God that it was brought to me. I will be kind, efficient, and merciful to any beast that I have dominion (stewardship) over. I take no pleasure in it and understand well where my meat comes from. As for war and murder....what must be done, must be done. There are times for everything under Heaven and there must be justice. God considered it to be a blessing to the evil, unrepentant ones to end their lives so that they could not sin anymore against his people. |
|
Despite what is sometimes portrayed in the media, especially from the US Council of Bishops, the Catechism of the Catholic Church says this:
Legitimate defense 2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not." 2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one's own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow: If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of another. 2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility. 2266 The efforts of the state to curb the spread of behavior harmful to people's rights and to the basic rules of civil society correspond to the requirement of safeguarding the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense. Punishment has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced by the offense. When it is willingly accepted by the guilty party, it assumes the value of expiation. Punishment then, in addition to defending public order and protecting people's safety, has a medicinal purpose: as far as possible, it must contribute to the correction of the guilty party. 2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor. If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person. Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent." |
|
Its a hell of a thing killing a man.
"We all have it comin', kid." |
|
Quoted:
Killing does not always equal murder. The Hebrew for the commandment uses the word 'ratsach' which literally means 'to murder, a murderer, to dash to pieces". So it reads, "Thou shalt not murder" Murder's definition includes 'malice' in the action of taking someone's life. The real issue with taking a human life or any life for that matter is forgiveness and restitution. There isn't any. You cannot ask the person in this life for their forgiveness nor can you restore what was taken. I will thank the animal for their sacrifice and thank God that it was brought to me. I will be kind, efficient, and merciful to any beast that I have dominion (stewardship) over. I take no pleasure in it and understand well where my meat comes from. As for war and murder....what must be done, must be done. There are times for everything under Heaven and there must be justice. God considered it to be a blessing to the evil, unrepentant ones to end their lives so that they could not sin anymore against his people. Drifting off topic, I wish more/all hunters were like you |
|
"Right" and "wrong" are social constructs that have nothing to do with any objective moral reality (which does not actually exist). They are merely the expressions of states of desire and preference. We would prefer to label killing (or rather, "murder") as wrong because being killed is an undesirable state of affairs.
In the grand scheme, we are no different from the weeds we pull from our gardens. "Sentient" and "conscious" are artificial categories that we contrive in order to maintain the illusion of existential demarcation. In reality, weeds merely consist of matter arranged into particular forms. And in reality, humans are nothing more; matter arranged into particular forms. Sentience is explainable in terms of purely material causal relations. How do we know that weeds don't enjoy a kind of sentience––or some kind of awareness of self––that is different from our own? We are not weeds; we are not epistemically positioned to formulate either positive or negative claims regarding their state of existence. The above scenario obtains if God does not exist. If you are an atheist, that's great. But don't try to make reality any more than it is. Read some Nieztsche and you'll be on the right track. |