Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That phrase has been the subject of a lot of debate in our past, as humanity, but there's another question that has a slightly different perspective, but revolves around the same moral issues.
What should we be willing to kill for?
No, I'm not wandering into foreign policy, or matters of war. What we do there should be guided by the answers to what, precisely, a slightly different matter of debate should be.
Not to debate police tactics... The question is, is this confrontation worth winning at the cost of his life?
There's another video of the Albuquerque police shooting a mentally unstable guy who wasn't doing much besides camping in a place he wasn't supposed to.
Most people will say that in neither case is death warranted. So, when is it?
Is it warranted to point guns at people to remove cows the government doesn't want in some place? The feds bringing guns is basically an admission they're willing to kill to get their way.
I know, some legal eagles will argue that it's "resisting" that will get you killed. Not always, but that's beside the point. If you resist paying income tax and arrest for it, they WILL kill you. Is that money worth killing someone to get?
Is it worth killing someone to enforce vehicle emission laws?
Homeland Security officers (armed) confiscated this vehicle for "emission compliance". If the owner doesn't hand it over, is it worth killing him for whatever 'benefit' or "reduced harm" the act may accomplish? I see a lot of people arguing these days, that morality requires government to forcibly adjust people's behavior and the outcome of their efforts - take their money, take their property, etc. Is it really worth killing someone to achieve?
Because ANY act or law government enforces, it does so by threat of death. If you don't comply, they WILL kill you when you resist.
So, when you ask government to do something... The question is: Is what you want enforced worth killing someone to achieve? If not, then you better not be wanting government to do it.
Nothing but life is worth killing for. The only time a person should ever be killed is if they are an immediate threat to another person's life. I have yet to see any other circumstance that warrants killing another.
Liberty
Rights
Freedoms...Live is worthless if you can live free, "Live free or die death is not the worst of evils"- John Stark
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnwmdk
That phrase has been the subject of a lot of debate in our past, as humanity, but there's another question that has a slightly different perspective, but revolves around the same moral issues.
What should we be willing to kill for?
No, I'm not wandering into foreign policy, or matters of war. What we do there should be guided by the answers to what, precisely, a slightly different matter of debate should be.
Not to debate police tactics... The question is, is this confrontation worth winning at the cost of his life?
There's another video of the Albuquerque police shooting a mentally unstable guy who wasn't doing much besides camping in a place he wasn't supposed to.
Most people will say that in neither case is death warranted. So, when is it?
Is it warranted to point guns at people to remove cows the government doesn't want in some place? The feds bringing guns is basically an admission they're willing to kill to get their way.
I know, some legal eagles will argue that it's "resisting" that will get you killed. Not always, but that's beside the point. If you resist paying income tax and arrest for it, they WILL kill you. Is that money worth killing someone to get?
Is it worth killing someone to enforce vehicle emission laws?
Homeland Security officers (armed) confiscated this vehicle for "emission compliance". If the owner doesn't hand it over, is it worth killing him for whatever 'benefit' or "reduced harm" the act may accomplish? I see a lot of people arguing these days, that morality requires government to forcibly adjust people's behavior and the outcome of their efforts - take their money, take their property, etc. Is it really worth killing someone to achieve?
Because ANY act or law government enforces, it does so by threat of death. If you don't comply, they WILL kill you when you resist.
So, when you ask government to do something... The question is: Is what you want enforced worth killing someone to achieve? If not, then you better not be wanting government to do it.
I think we might have to water the tree of liberty...It is very perched.
When is it ok to resists unjust authority? This video gives you a general idea.
Watch the whole video to get the full meaning..
Last edited by Oldhag1; 08-02-2014 at 07:05 PM..
Reason: Merge
i would kill or die to protect my friends and family, and i would kill or die to protect my country, and myself, and the life of an innocent person, beyond that would depend on the situation.
Freedom. That's about it for willing to die for. I don't think anyone in this country has died for freedom for quite sometime. Maybe 200 years. Americans have died for someone else's freedom, or so we are told, in other countries. Hasn't worked out too well.
Dying while saving the life of another is rare. It happens but I bet most people do not know anyone that has. Usually only happens when we are supposedly fighting for someone else's freedom in another country.
WW2. Nope. We were attacked. Never made an effort to save the Jews. Civil War. Nope. Wasn't fought to stop slavery. I guess it would have to go back to the War of 1812.
Dying while saving the life of another is rare. It happens but I bet most people do not know anyone that has. Usually only happens when we are supposedly fighting for someone else's freedom in another country.
9/11 is a good example of a time when this happened recently, when all those firefighters died saving the lives of those trapped in the WTC.
Everyone dies. Deserves has nothing to do with it. We all will die. The details of that death will be different for anyone, but dead is dead. Worth has nothing to do with it in my opinion.
I believe the better question that everyone should ask themselves, what is worth living for. Lets face it, life on Earth can be a living hell. We escape that pain of living with death. Its a release. If you live your life, living what you find worth in, then your life will be happy, and your death, however it may come, will find you at peace.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
