Since then I have killed to prevent myself being killed and killed to stop others from being killed. Killing someone in such unjustified way has always been a matter of open discussion. God's logic on this issue will never be understood until we get into heaven. It comes down to this: what is right and wrong or good and bad is sometimes different to the right thing to do or the thing you can justify. When I read your article it brought some of these questions to mind and I guess I just kinda blurted them out. The stronger nations or alliances will take the spoils and understand that they will also have to defend them.
. Anything else is a failure in both moral and practical terms. The author never stated why the mariner shot the bird with his crossbow. Also the lies people will say when they want to protect what is close to them. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2000.
What would have happened if someone had have killed him because they felt they were the hand of God? In conclusion each of the above needs to be justified on their own merits. Alliances, treaties and even global commerce have made the world far safer than ever before. Like the title says this is like a domino effect. I was simply pointing out that I do make that distinction. Two days later i went to the police and reported myself as being involved in the recent break in and then i also reported to them what i knew of the mugging and of what the other two people had said to me about setting me up. Were I in that situation I might kill. Also, the father asked if I would take this question even further by considering those unfortunate incidents when policemen kill people, because he anticipated that this is the next question his son would be asking.
That is why we need governance to control our proclivity to kill each other. You are there to defend your county and if it means killing, then it has to be done. I promise to post the video I would enjoy helping you play the part of loser in more ways then just rhetorically. The bomb exploded shortly after when Colonel Stauffenberge leave the room, killing four people, but Hitler unharmed. This was to determine whether the new vaccine could reduce the incidence of paralytic polio. But, that's jut my opinion. Getting people to regard other people as enemies is a necessary prerequisite for the rise of the worst sort of tyranny.
Roman gladiatorial combat was barbaric, but it fulfilled a societal need. In such a case, you could not choose to do a good thing but had to choose between two bad things. Do not imagine that you can combat a sickness without killing what causes it, without annihilating the germ'. Let me give you an analogy: Imagine you have committed a crime, and thus, you are now on trial. How can we justify hypocritically killing human life in war if we denounce it so much? The police had no reports of the attack on a man being stabbed , however he had been mugged. But is tyrannicide ethically justified? Not only do i agree on this , but we could always broaden this to , using them , instead of animals , for experiments and testing of human products.
This principle is embedded in and has been respected by most states around the world. And, if we may, by what means are we permitted to do so? But eventually there will be war to control these ever-declining resources. I personally cannot imagine any such situation, so I hope you might supply an example, even if it is hypothetical. Why am I a Christian, blessed in doing what everyone tells me is wrong for a Christian to do? Welcome to CreateDebate CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy. However there are many reasons including those that I stated where murder can be justified. Keep up the good work son. Look retard, it's not the most sophisticated concept to figure out.
Were the assassination of a despot to cause the loss of innocent lives, the morality of such an action would be questionable, to say the least. It is not difficult to imagine a situation in which murder is the morally correct action. Whilst in these situations violence is often the result of desperation and emotion, it is only ever justified if you have good reasons that predict a successful outcome rather than more conflict and a declining situation. So, the people serving their governments military have no human worth because of where they were born? I wonder if anyone would be interested to see it. So the more murder there is, the more desire for revenge. Killing makes us killers, which isn't any better than what some people are against.
That is why killing can be justified and if I was able to I would have killed any number of people to prevent other innocent people from dying. It was not uncommon that much of these involved the brutal and unrelenting slaughter of man, much of which went ultimately unpunished. Murder in a legal sense or in the more general sense? Clearly, they have never faced a force-on-force encounter, otherwise their moral stance would have resulted in them being dead. Hunters also claim that they hardly ever catch foxes and in many cases foxes escape unharmed but imagine how you would feel if you are being chased by more that 40 dogs gnashing at your heels. It is moral if it makes no one's life worse. I had heard of the Killing fields before but never realized the devastation that occurred in Cambodia. Honestly , i sound like a hypocrit.
Supreme Court ruling of District of Columbia v. When the air is crowded, everyone laughed, John Wilkes shot Lincoln and escaped through the back door. There are two countries that are in sharp contrast: Japan and South Africa. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. We distinguish the good characters from the evil characters in our minds. Some people try to use dilemmas such as these to justify killing and war and the like.