(September 14, 2015 at 1:44 pm)Losty Wrote:(September 14, 2015 at 1:22 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I see it differently, Losty. I see self defense as justice, not as saying one life is more important than the other life.
As for your last part, I said "an innocent life." I don't think it's right to kill one innocent person to save another innocent person. Let's say you're in the military and a group of terrorists captured you and your fellow soldier. As a way to torture you, they hold a gun up to your head and say, "kill your partner, otherwise we kill you." This stuff actually happens. Objectively speaking, I still think it would be wrong to kill your partner. I wouldn't cast any judgement on you because of the extremely difficult/impossible position you were in, though.
I assume you wouldn't cast judgement at right?
It looks like you are saying that innocent lives are more valuable than those lives of people who are not innocent. Sure...you can call it justice if you want to, but it makes no sense to say you're justified in taking a person's life if that person's life is equal to yours in value. Innocent or not, if you justify killing a person then you don't value their life as much as whomever you are protecting them from.
Personally, I don't think it would be morally wrong to kill someone under duress, but I don't think I could do it.
I don't think so. If that was the case, I would be all for the death penalty, but I am not.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh
