Welcome to Librarium Online!
Yes its a step up from hitting a women. But does anyone acutally have the right to kill a man (or woman)? Or is there always another way out, even though we can't see it? Here are some quotes which seem to sum up the sides for me.
"You shouldn't have taken their lives. No matter how evil thier deeds, or behaviour, the decision to take away life was never yours, and will never be to make!"
or (in terms of a metahpor, and in realtion - should you save the butterfly trapped in a spiders web- by killing the spider?)
â€œIf you keep saving butterflies, the spiders will die! But...wanting to save both is a contradiction. What would you rather do? Keep deliberating? The butterfly will be eaten in the meantime.â€?
Love and peace,
The only time I'd ever kill a man (or a woman) is if they were trying to kill me. If it was either them or me, I'd rather they die.
Simple, but that's what I believe. Other than that, I would never kill someone unless I was left with no other choice.
Firefly says it all in the episode "War Stories"
ZOE: Preacher, don't the Bible have some pretty specific things to say about killing?
BOOK: Quite specific. It is, however, somewhat fuzzier on the subject of kneecaps.
Mysterious Member of the ANZAC Clan
Well i used to work for the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority, and a majority of the cases that we dealt with usually had one person walked away then nothing would have happened. Although there was a fair number of cases that happened just because somone is in the wrong place at the wrong time. In self defense if there was absoultley no other option then i would say yes, however there are very few situations where there is no other option.
I really can't see that any time it is right to kill a man. And I don't think that I ever could. But then again I've never been in a situation where I was forced to makes decision like that (and I hope that I never will). I find killing in self defense as bad as killing just for killing. I really can't see why people would kill each other. But it is probably just some kind of thing the human species does. It is sadly but yet true humans are nearly the only species on the earth who kills itself just because..... well I don't know why we do it but we do
It's rare i post in enhanced - often what i have to say has already been stated - but this subject actually came up in a general studies class i took part in yesterday.
In my opinion, there are situations where it is ok to kill. For example, one of the situations put forward to us yesterday -
"You are a VIP in a dictatorship, and are taken to the local prison. You are given a tour by the warden and told that today is a special festival, in which you will have the opportunity to save several prisoners from execution. Six political prisoners are up for execution - you can either shoot one and the others will be set free, or otherwise all six will be executed. What do you choose to do?"
Note that you have to choose to shoot or ignore, there are no other options. Now while in fact choosing the man to die will be difficult, surely it would be better to allow one man to die to allow the others to live? "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" is what i live by (and i do know the origin of the quote) as i think it's a very valid point.
Another question was:
"You are a doctor. A man walks into your hospital and tells you that his family is dying. His brother and sister need a kidney each, his mother needs a heart and his father needs a lung. He is a perfect tissue match. The man asks you to give him a lethal injection and then take his organs and give them to his family - they will die without them. He is serious in his claims that if you do not do it he will go to a backstreet doctor who has agreed to have a go at the operation for a small fee. What do you do?"
In that situation also, hippocratic oath and losing your license/going to court aside, i personally feel it would be right to kill the man in order to save the many lives in his family. If he's going to a backstreet doctor if you refuse, where the organs could be wasted and the operation go wrong, surely it would be a lot safer to do it yourself where it is much more likely it will be succesful. Then again, by losing your license you may have already condemned potential patients to death. That one's a very tricky one.
As for things like the military, i personally think that a soldier goes into the military knowing what they must do - he or she is willing to lay down their life for their country. The guy down the other end of your gun sights was also aware that death was a possibility when he joined up. The thing is, both you and that guy are betting your life against the other and as such, whoever gets killed was aware of the possibility and would have been quite willing to shoot you back. Fair play, i think.
There are certain other factors which must be taken into account - i.e. what you would consider killing. I use another example from general studies:
"A train is rushing towards a set of points. On one track a baby has crawled onto the line, in the path of the oncoming train. On the other is a drunken old tramp. Do you change the points and allow the train to kill the tramp, or allow it to continue on unheeded?"
Now, while some of you may wish to give your views on this (by all means, feel free) if you see this incident going on, what would you define as killing? If you do not intervene, some will say you allowed the baby to die and therefore are a murderer by neglecting to save the baby. But by changing the points, you will be responsible for the train hitting the tramp, and as such, will be accused of manslaughter at least, mitigating circumstances aside. But is it right to kill the tramp to save the baby? Would it be right to kill in those circumstances? It's a very grey area.
Have a think, and feel free to state your opinion and course of action in the above hypothetical situations. It would be interesting to hear.
Anyway, those are basically my views on the subject. Hope my, what, second post in enhanced has an impact.
The only difference between tattooed people and non-tattooed people is that tattooed people are awesome and can kick your ass.
"War does not determine who is right - only who is left."
I can't really answer this question.. Because it depends what moral 'level' you're working on.
Firstly, let's look at 'nature.' Under natural law, anyone has the right to kill anyone, and no morality guides it. If I stab someone, it doesn't matter how virtuous or amazing they are, they're going to bleed to death. Indeed, morality is determined by the person who survives, so in order to be good.. we need to kill those who think we are bad.
Of course, there are different moral levels working up from that, and if you work on that level, you might have a few problems fitting into human society. Ultimately, that's the only other really valid level.. What society tollerates. If your society will allow you to kill someone, there is no physical reason why you shouldn't.
Finally, there's religious ideas about killing. Which only apply if you have a religious belief (including things like humanism which are moral codes but don't involve any kind of metaphysical stuff, they're all religions for this purpose.)
I'm not sure. On one level, everyone has the right to life, even people who've done things that're hideously wrong, so long as they can be contained. But the whole "few for the many" debate, I really don't know. It's self-sacrifice yes, but in a random situation, it would be so easy to make the wrong choice. I don't know.
"Greater love have no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends." - John 15:13
#But as far as killing in a general situation goes, I would never do it. Whether in peace or war, I would do my level best to avoid it.
(My belief) Outside of the "kill or be killed" scenario, I can't fathom any reasonable ground to kill another human being.
Not only that, I think "kill or be killed" usually implies a massive lack of creativity.
If someone attacks you with intent to kill you, all you really have to do is prevent them from harming you. There's plenty of ways to do that without killing. A shoulder-breaking technique, for example.
WHFB: Dwarfs || WH40k: Imperial Fists, Necrons || WM/H: Trollbloods || BFG: Necrons
i dont think its ever right to kill another human being, and i seriously doubt i have the mental capacity to do it anyway. In a kill or be killed situation its understandable, but not right- its about the only thing i agree with the bible on! (i'll covet any damn ass i want!)
PLAN CLAN MAN!!
He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man- S. Johnson