Morally speaking..Is it ever OK to kill? To steal?

[murray hill farm]

just wondering what some of you think about this..it is a traditional values clarification question..and of course..no right or wrong answers...just your thoughts on it.

[bleedingheart]

1. Only if you are a corporation...cuz corporations are people under the law

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

2. Self-defense, yes. I would not be here and I have no moral qualms

about it at all.
Of course, I did not sleep for quite a while afterward, but the alternative does not seem too palatable.

[Artemis Bunyon]

3. Morals are an illusion. You are free to do whatever you want to do...

...as long as you're willing to face up to the repercussions.

Absolutely, nightmarishly free.

[murray hill farm]

5. In your own heart...

would u ever be able to kill or steal..and feel that it was the right thing for you personally to do?

[Artemis Bunyon]

11. Absolutely.

It is social conditioning and a desire to avoid serious consequences (by which I don't just mean 'the law') that prevents me (and everyone else) from taking such actions.

[fishwax]

26. That's a little oversimplified

unless you consider compassion to be merely social conditioning. Plenty of things keep people from killing others or stealing from others, including simple self interest (even aside from the threat of punishment or other consequences).

[Artemis Bunyon]

36. Far from it. In fact, it's incredibly complex.

That's why the human race is so screwed up.

[tk2kewl]

4. Self defense OK. Stealing something back OK.

with me, that is

[murray hill farm]

8. how about to protect a friend or child..would it be OK to kill then?

[nickinSTL]

15. That would be up to the individual's conscience

I wouldn't be likely to kill for a stranger, but to protect a loved one, yes.

Not necessarily the most enlightened position I suppose, but I'd have to feel very strongly about someone to kill for them.

[tk2kewl]

40. Good point.

basically anything that under the law can be considered justifiable homicide

[LiberalVoice]

6. I'll tell you one thing.

If I was Matthew Shepards brother and those conservative pieces of shit showed up at his funeral with a "God Hates Fags" sign...You wouldn't be able to tear me of of them.

[mattclearing]

7. I don't believe in violence at all.

I think it is a desperation tactic that will only bring more misfortune on the person who resorts to it.

I like to believe in the turn the other cheek wisdom.

It is not lost on me though, that some of the greatest proponents of this philosophy (Jesus, MLK, etc.) wound up dead for their troubles.

They are also shining examples of what a life well-lived looks like for us all.

[Bunny]

10. Do you believe in self-defense?

Or would you just stand there and let someone kill you?

[mattclearing]

13. I said I believe in the wisdom of turn the other cheek.

I would certainly defend myself if necessary, but I don't believe in physical violence.

Ultimately I think it is most important to strive to eradicate this kind of behavior.

And I haven't been attacked recently, so I don't know how I would react anymore.

I'd like to think I would escape with my life and without damaging my commitment to non-violent reconciliation.

[ET Awful]

12. To poorly paraphrase Mahatma Gandhi . . .

There are many causes for which I am prepared to die. I can't think of a single cause for which I am prepared to kill.

[mattclearing]

14. And if you could see my signature line, you would see that it is also

a quote from Gandhi: "Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony."

[ET Awful]

16. Wise fellow that Gandhi, he made a lot of sense. :) n/t

[mattclearing]

18. And a lot of enemies.

O8)

[ET Awful]

25. I would rather be right and have enemies, than be wrong and have

all the friends in the world.

[mattclearing]

30. Amen to that.

eom

[Kitka]

34. I agree that using violence will always bring bad karma...

But sometimes the good karma that results from the same negative actions can lessen or negate that bad karma.

[kcwayne]

9. Yes

Killing Hitler in 1941 would have been a good thing, millions could have lived.

Stealing the atomic bomb secrets from the US was a good thing in the long run. Had there been no fear of reprisal from the Soviets, McNamara would have been blowing up half of China with it.

[wuushew]

19. The uncertainty of consequence poses a problem

While killing Hitler in 1941 may have prevented certain ethnic abuses, his lack of interference in the Russian campaign may have allowed for the capture of Moscow and the possible defeat of the Soviet Union. The 1944 bomb plot surely was a more supportable effort as the war was clearly lost by then.

Same logic applies to Bush and stopping his Iraq genocide. Is one head of state and what he represents worth more 300,000 Iraqi lives?

[kcwayne]

33. Any decision has multiple probable outcomes

and when you make the decision, you don't have the benefit of knowing the future. But in 1941, it was clear that Hitler was responsible for mass catastrophe and the benefits of killing him were clear. It goes much deeper than "certain ethic abuses", Hitler's actions caused the death of some 30 million people in Europe alone.

One could look forward in 1941 and reliably forecast that the death and destruction would be very high with Hitler remaining in power. It would be harder to predict what his replacements would do and what impact they would have in the calculus. Hitler's General Staff were far more pragmatic than Hitler, and one could easily arrive at the conclusion that they would reverse course and sue for peace instead of trying to conquer Russia.

The real question is do you remove a known evil, or do you shirk from it because you don't know with certainty what the consequence of inaction is?

[wuushew]

39. I agree mostly

But probable outcomes can be offered by anyone. Who is say that the flowers and sunshine was not as just possible as a full grown insurgency? The latter was much more likely in my mind and has been proven correct by events. If we are to react to all possible negative events I fail to see why the interstate speed limits are 65, alcohol is a legal product or why all men are not castrated in the name of pre-crime prevention.

The events that have the most correct validation are those that are reacted to after the fact. That is why preemptive military action is discouraged. At least with the killing Hitler a world war was already in progress. I don't know if the murder of Hitler the painter or Hitler the infant should be supported.

[intheflow]

17. Yes to both.

I would kill in self-defense and to protect my child, I'm pretty sure. I'd probably feel horrible after, but I think my instincts for self- and family-preservation would just kick in.

Stealing? Sure. If I was starving, if I were homeless... Again, self-survival instincts would kick in.

For instance, is it immoral to steal water if seriously dehydrated? I was at a concert once where they didn't allow anyone to bring in outside beverages. It got to be 101 degrees, and tiny bottle of water were being sold for $4.00 a piece. People were passing out, and eventually, it led to a minor riot. So why would it be immoral to steal that water, but not immoral to sell it at inflated prices? Morality cuts both ways, and individual circumstances always have to be taken into account.

[murray hill farm]

22. I think so too!!

self preservation is very strong in us!

[mcscajun]

20. Killing in self-defense...in the extreme situation...

...of really defending yourself or your family under imminent threat, yes. It's okay in my book. "Self-defense" to eliminate a perceived future threat? No.

Stealing? Generally indefensible, except again in extremis.

I picture the Jean Valjean defense here. If you or your child (disclaimer: I have none) is truly starving, or in desperate need of life-sustaining/saving medicine, and you have no other recourse, no family, no friends, no church or government aid, and you or your child need the food or medicine to survive, then you'll do it. Your conscience may bother you, but you'll be alive to have the argument with yourself and perhaps make restitution later.

[Swamp Rat]

21. 'Morality' doesn't exist... 'traditional values' don't exist.

They never did.

[murray hill farm]

27. OK, then..

how about your personal sense of right or wrong about killing or stealing? Or..are there situations in which you would do one or both?

[Swamp Rat]

31. I can only answer from my present perspective:

At this moment, I have no need to alter my personal ethics concerning stealing.

I have always been against killing, for any reason, since childhood. I hope I never have the need to alter this self-imposed rule.

[raggedcompany]

23. Of course

self defense of an attack justifies murder

stealing in order to eat, for medicine, for hygiene (same thing as medicine, finally), for shelter, all fine.

bicker about definitions if you like.

[seaj11]

24. Only OK to kill in self-defense.

Otherwise, you'll bring bad karma onto yourself. As for the death penalty, well...there are worse things than death. Let murderers reap what they sow.

Elle
http://www.nophicent.org

[SmokingJacket]

28. Yes, it's "okay" sometimes.

If I could time travel, go back in time, and kill Hitler in 1933, I would do it and feel totally morally justified. If someone walked up to him during the war, knowing that millions of Jews were in peril and so shot him in cold blood, that would be okay too.

If anyone tried to hurt or kidnap my kid, and the only way I could stop him was with a gun and I got him in the head, fine. I don't believe there ARE ANY moral absolutes.

I disagree with the death penalty because 1) the government shouldn't kill its citizens and 2) innocent people will be executed.

If your children are starving to death, it's MORAL to steal food to feed them if you can't get food any other way.

Right-wingers want everything to be black and white and simple, but things rarely are.

[UdoKier]

29. Yes.

If you are starving, your neighbors have ample food and will not help, you may snatch some bread if you absolutely must.

And killing in the process of overthrowing a murderous despot is sometimes inevitable...

[Kitka]

32. I believe in the color grey.

I think that killing, stealing, etc. is always wrong, but it's not black and white. Some instances are more justifiable than others. It's never a positive thing to do, but sometimes we have to make a judgment call and realize that we are willing to accept committing an immoral act because the consequences of not doing so are too great. For example? Stealing food because my kids are going to starve.

[patcox2]

35. Moral principals of justification and excuse.

Yes, indeed, it is morally okay to kill or steal, in specified circumstances. The circumstances are set forth in the principles of justification and excuse. They differ in that what is justified is considered moral, whereas what is excused is still considered wrong but the actor is excused in the circumstances.

Just two examples: It is moral to kill Dr. Evil to prevent him from pushing the button which will detonate an H-bomb and kill millions. It is not moral to make a mistake as to the identity of Dr. Evil and kill the wrong person, but in some cases it might be an excused mistake because anyone would have made the same mistake in the circumstances.

[murray hill farm]

38. By "morally"..i should have been more clear, i guess!!

sorry about that..what i meant by morally..is not the socially defined or religously defined or traditionally defince."morality", but personal morality..personal sense of right or wrong.

[murray hill farm]

41. to lighten this up a bit..ha

when i asked my 8 yr old grandaughter this question, she said yes ..it is OK to kill mosquittos and biting spiders.

[CityZen-X]

37. A Time For War, A Time For Peace?

What is left for us to do. I recall the Weather Underground, Symbaniese Liberation Army. If peace full means fail to liberate, we may have to take matters in our own hands. Such like the early revolutionaries did during the British occupation.
Lets face it people we are being occupied by forces that are detrimental to our freedom.

As the Zimm once stated in "All Along the Watchtower" "there are many here amongst us that feel that life is just a joke."
It's no joke it's all about tomorrow and the future of our children.

[baby_mouse]

42. Yes

It's OK to kill if someone is trying to kill you or someone else and there's no way to stop them other than to kill them, and it's OK to steal food if there's no other way of feeding yourself.