| Greetings to those who are guests and possibly prospective members of this site. I won't lie, the site is not excessively active but it has a daily presence of members. There is a level of activity that is more laid back and that may suit some people more than others. If you prefer no pressure posting and social discussions and interactions then this is the place for you. Have a look at our available forums to see what we offer as a site. If anything strikes your mood, why not talk to someone in the Chatango chat box at the bottom of every page. If you like what you see then why not join the community. |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Killing; When is it ethical? | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Apr 6 2011, 08:41 PM (632 Views) | |
| Darth Keeg | Apr 6 2011, 08:41 PM Post #1 |
![]()
|
So in order to get the General Discussion up and running, I decided to do what Poo does sometimes and develop ethical dilemmas into topics. So when do you think killing is ethical, in war, in self-defense, is it ethical at all? I see killing as something that should be done in self-defense only (a war would be like that too IMO, the common soldier doesn't get to choose whether to attack someone or not), or to defend someone else. However, I will say that I do somewhat emphasize with revenge if the cause for said revenge is severe enough. Edited by Darth Keeg, Apr 7 2011, 12:44 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Jay | Apr 6 2011, 09:17 PM Post #2 |
![]()
Resident Nen User
|
I'm sorry to do this, but it has to be done. That's just the first thing that popped into my head when I saw this. Sorry. I might post more thoughts later. |
![]() |
|
| Snow White | Apr 6 2011, 11:55 PM Post #3 |
![]()
And not a fuck was given
|
If you kill someone to protect yourself, or someone else, it's not murder. Any other scenario it's murder. I'm not a supporter of war. We can solve our problems civally without harming others. Give peace a chance :3 |
![]() |
|
| DFlame | Apr 7 2011, 12:04 AM Post #4 |
![]()
guy who is never around
|
Killing is bad, mmkay. You shouldn't kill, mmmkay. But sometimes it's not avoidable, at least not without risking the life or wellbeing of someone innocent, mmmkay. In these situations, killing can be a justified, though still not preferred, outcome... mmmmkay. |
![]() |
|
| Lithas | Apr 11 2011, 04:04 AM Post #5 |
![]()
The One
|
One could argue that all death is for the preservation of more life, I'd be interested in seeing some other variations on this topic. What about Capital Punishment? The people killed in this way are generally no longer a threat to society, and it's not unheard of for an innocent person to get 'the chair.' However, the threat of death is sometimes the only deterrent to certain people. |
![]() |
|
| Snow White | Apr 11 2011, 04:08 AM Post #6 |
![]()
And not a fuck was given
|
Being locked up in a prison cell for the rest of your life is another solution. You don't have to kill a dangerous person to eliminate them as a threat. Prolong what is considered a life sentence, i.e. 25 years, rather than just killing them off
|
![]() |
|
| Darth Keeg | Apr 11 2011, 11:57 AM Post #7 |
![]()
|
But keeping someone in jail costs more than keeping someone in a 5-star hotel, it's really expensive. The death sentence saves the country a lot of money, and besides, when you think about it the people kept in jail would probably prefer to die anyway (well except for being free of course, but that ain't an option). |
![]() |
|
| DFlame | Apr 11 2011, 01:01 PM Post #8 |
![]()
guy who is never around
|
Ah, but what is the cost of a human life? Even if that life might be stained with wickedness, life itself is of some value. And you they would probably prefer to die, but I wonder if that's actually the case. Sure, there may be some who'd prefer that, but there are likely others who'd say otherwise. And yes, there is the fear of executing an innocent, which is just about the most horrible thing that can be done. |
![]() |
|
| Lithas | Apr 11 2011, 02:26 PM Post #9 |
![]()
The One
|
Aside from the people actually being executed, the death sentence as a threat can save lives. Pain of death is the only thing that stops some people from committing some rather heinous crimes. |
![]() |
|
| Darth Keeg | Apr 13 2011, 08:10 AM Post #10 |
![]()
|
I don't see a human life which has hurtful to me and society in general as having any value at all really, it's not like they could help anyone from jail, or at least the likelihood of that happening would be greatly reduced. |
![]() |
|
| Jim Profit | Apr 19 2011, 08:25 AM Post #11 |
![]()
|
I say it's always justified. Now before people go and butthurt, I'll explain... Killing is a natural desire and response to things that HURT us. You know why we're all sick, fat, and effeminate? Because we can't kill the thing that bothers us. We are going against our fight or flight mechanism. Here's an example; Richard the rapist Burlew has wronged me. He has unequivocally put me in a bad position by banning me from his forum, while rapists and terrorists get to post. I'm not exaggerating. When you call fucking a girl while she's passed out inappropriate cuddling, or you gloat about you having codes the FBI cannot crack, these are words you should be called, because they are the truth. Now... regardless of that, his putrid little ass felt the need to emasculate me, and pull some shit on me, just because he can. Then again, he's a sick demented fuck who likes rape and terrorism... so I shouldn't be surprised. The only response I can legally do, is try to in some abstract way, get revenge. I have to hope that through my arbitrary passive aggressive antics of bitching about him, and pointing out the possible crimes he's committed, that something very bad will befall him. How impractical and ridiculous. No wonder I'm constantly angry. OR... I can just suck it up, deal with the ban, and pretend that it's okay. That "oh, well it's his forum", and just admit he made me his bitch, and it's another successful rape under his belt. Submission is not flight. I did not get to choose to run from that fight. For any who ARE curious how a flight reaction would go down on the internet. It would go something like everyone hated you, and was trolling you, and you made a big stink about it. You know those kinds. The "I'm leaving and never coming back!" Whether or not they're being sincere... THAT is the flight mechanism. That is making the conscious choice to escape. That option was available to you, and seemed better then just arguing with a bunch of faggots tediously... I didn't get that option. I also did not get the option to fight back. Because really, how can you argue with a moderator? It's like coming in unarmed, naked, and he's got a fucking assault rifle in his hands. Even if I could somehow prevent him from using the ban button, he'd still have an advantage of everyone slobbering all over his dick. But at least that I could live with. So yes, I think killing is always justified. I think killing is a natural and healthy response to sickos getting what they deserve. I don't believe there is a "victim" in a murder trial, only someone blowing the situation out of proportion. Ironically, how I would describe murder in most cases is "overkill". But the same way a woman can justify having an abortion because there's no point in her life going in the crapper for some little brat, why can't we hold the same passion and defense for murder in general? You know what? A kid, as pain in the ass as they may be, is not at fault for being born. I should have pulled out. But it IS Richard Burlew's fault for constantly patronizing me and being the sick little shit that he is. Not to say I think we should just completely ignore murder cases. Even though I wouldn't MIND that. The practical solution is right in front of us. Dueling was legal once before... why can't it be again? They don't tell you this in history class, but really... dueling wasn't all guns and roses. It was a contract between two or more parties. Usually, if you initiated the duel, you didn't get to decide the tenants of it. The person who was challenged did. To decline a challenge though was to invite ridicule, dishonor, and you obviously must've done something pretty bad for someone to want to duel you. I'd challenge Richard Burlew, moot, and all the other scumbag mods to a duel if I had the chance. They could run away like a pussy, or face me like a man. The way nature intended. The way that got us this far in the evolutionary line... I'd say there should be stimulations to dueling too that if you decline, you have to pay a fee. A relatively cheap fee. But it's useless in our modern culture if they can just say no. Because we have become abominations. Are men are little more then hairy little girls. We're fucking pathetic. And it's going to take decades before our culture recovers from this debauchery! |
![]() |
|
| Darth Keeg | Apr 19 2011, 11:14 AM Post #12 |
![]()
|
Well sorry, but I don't think it'd work. I think you're letting your anger cloud your judgment a bit, and granted, while the things you describe are indeed unjust to say the least, there are a few flaws to dueling. First flaw would be that the "bad guy" wouldn't necessarily die, this isn't a movie, and most people who do deserve death are normally far more experienced at dishing it out as well. While I do support the idea of the death penalty, as I see a negative value to certain human lives, dueling doesn't necessarily solve that problem. Furthermore, how do you know most people won't challenge others to a duel for no reason? I can definitely see an ignorant 12 year old challenging a friend to a duel because of something really stupid. Would you put an age on it then? Well I'm sure that under the influence of alcohol plenty of adults are bound to make that mistake as well. Now as for the abortion thing... well lets put it this way, a child depends on their parents, a child has no chance of living without their parents. Raising a child requires a lot of time and effort. If the parents, and in a lot of cases it's a single mother when it comes to abortions, can't give that time, not only will the mother be screwed, but so will the child. that's the difference between abortions and just killing off people who annoy you (as vile and despicable as they may be), the child will also suffer. You could argue that a vile and despicable person causes a lot of harm to their environment, well I say that the only way to truly prove that is by trial, while if a woman wants an abortion than she must not have the proper means, or will, to raise the child, which would obviously fuck the child's life in the long run if she doesn't get an abortion. |
![]() |
|
| DFlame | Apr 19 2011, 02:11 PM Post #13 |
![]()
guy who is never around
|
I'm not really sure how to respond to such a vile, reprehensible philosophy. To say that killing is sometimes justified is one thing, but to say it always is or to suggest vigilante style justice is a whole other story. Do you really think it's okay to kill anyone for any stupid little reason, or for no reason at all even? I'm not entirely sure what point you were trying to get with your story of getting banned. So you got banned from a forum, big fucking deal. You say something about rape and terrorism, but I'm fairly sure you have no evidence of any such acts since if you did you could make sure legal action was taken. That's exactly why we live with a justice system, so that we can do our best to judge someones innocence or guilt rather than letting one person make a likely false judgement when taking things into their own hand. Yes, the system isn't perfect and some villains may get off, but what's more important is that fewer innocents get punished or killed. You say that killing is a "natural and healthy response to sickos getting what they deserve" but you have no assurance that it's the sickos that will get killed. You suggest dueling, but dueling in no way allows one to determine another's innocence or guilt. It would only lead to the death of decent people. There is a reason why we as a society have evolved past these barbaric means of conflict resolution. I'd also argue that all life has some value. It's the most important thing there is, once a life is gone it's gone for good and can never be returned. Though I can understand the idea the idea that some people's life may be so stained that they're better off dead, even if I personally disagree with it. Edited by DFlame, Apr 19 2011, 02:12 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Professional Protagonist | Apr 19 2011, 02:13 PM Post #14 |
![]()
Girl power
|
Actually, it costs more money in court cost and procedure than it takes to sustain an inmate for life. |
![]() |
|
| POOHEAD189 | Apr 27 2011, 03:11 AM Post #15 |
![]()
|
I think that peace and non violence are the desired ends for all mankind. But to say killing is never justifiable is silly. Killing is justified when you protect an innocent. This can be in many situations, but that is the main justification of killing. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2















5:16 PM Jul 13