Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Moral Dilemma Exercise
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="donner" data-source="post: 3283212" data-attributes="member: 277"><p>Morals, sure, but that does not immediately make murder immoral.</p><p></p><p>For example, if one supports the death penalty (for whatever reason) then they condone the idea that there are times when taking a life is justified. The only reason we don't call it murder is because we've decided that 'a fair trial' removes the immorality of it. Now, in this thread the person in question is Hitler, whose crimes against humanity are not in question. So, since we can't execute him after the fact, we are asked to consider killing him as a child (thus saving millions perhaps). In this scenario we already know his crimes and guilt, but are left to ponder whether 10 year old hitler is 'innocent' or not.</p><p></p><p>All that to say that it's not hard to find examples where we think that murdering another person is morally justified. The biggest difference is that we usually call it something else to justify it to ourselves. And i'm not assigning right or wrong here, just pointing out that the act of killing another person (especially under the guise of saving others) is common. The real questions here is more about the innocence of youth and the 'can things be different' via some other option.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="donner, post: 3283212, member: 277"] Morals, sure, but that does not immediately make murder immoral. For example, if one supports the death penalty (for whatever reason) then they condone the idea that there are times when taking a life is justified. The only reason we don't call it murder is because we've decided that 'a fair trial' removes the immorality of it. Now, in this thread the person in question is Hitler, whose crimes against humanity are not in question. So, since we can't execute him after the fact, we are asked to consider killing him as a child (thus saving millions perhaps). In this scenario we already know his crimes and guilt, but are left to ponder whether 10 year old hitler is 'innocent' or not. All that to say that it's not hard to find examples where we think that murdering another person is morally justified. The biggest difference is that we usually call it something else to justify it to ourselves. And i'm not assigning right or wrong here, just pointing out that the act of killing another person (especially under the guise of saving others) is common. The real questions here is more about the innocence of youth and the 'can things be different' via some other option. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Moral Dilemma Exercise
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom