Immoral Killing

[Phileas Fogg]

Is killing inherently immoral, or some specific types of killing, depends on reasoning and circumstances can be morally justified? Can killing dozens of people, less or more, in the battlefield be considered to be morally justified? Can executions be considered to morally justified killing? Can killing, as part of self defence, be morally justified?

Discuss

[CtrlAltDe1337]

No, killing is not wrong in all cases. Things like capital punishment, wars (fighting soldiers, not killing civilians), and self-defence are cases where (imo) killing is not wrong.

[Thanatos]

Killing is not wrong in all cases.

[Manco]

Murder is wrong, killing not necessarily.

Self-defence is imo justified. Concerning executions I'm torn, on one hand the problem is removed, on the other hand the problem wasn't truly solved. I'm against it though, because I feel the death of even only one innocent but wrongly condemned man is enough to never do it again. And there have been innocent people executed.

War is a different matter, I consider it wrong yet I won't judge. I would kill people to defend my freedom, but I know that most of them didn't want to impede my freedom but were thrown there by their superiors.

[Soulghast]

Taking another person's or being's life cannot be right in anyway. In some cases, like a war, it is necessary, if you are to survive, but necessity does not make it morally right.

Capital punishment is completely wrong though, as killing the person is not even necessary in such a case, and does not remove a problem.

I am a human, and I would kill to protect myself, but that would not make it right in any case.

So, yes all killings, no matter the circusmtances, can be considered "immoral", in my opinion.

[Bovril]

My opinion on the subject goes a little something like this:
Revenge is not a legitimate form of action (ask me to explain if you like), therefore killing can only be legitimate to prevent future negative consequences. The obvious example is direct defence. However, indirect defence (say, bombing a communications station of a nation that has invaded yours) is also acceptable, since communities, as well as individuals, take part in aggresion and defense.
Now, how do we asess how negative the consequences must be in order to justify killing. I will illustrate this point. If some one is about to flick your ear and the only way you can stop them is by killing them, is it ok to kill them? I imagine you said no to that. Fine, and if some one was about to kill two innocent people and the only way you could stop them was to kill them, would you do so? I imagine you would say yes. But where does one draw the line?

It is upon this point that I think we can have a usefull debate.

My initial response would be something like: killing is justified when when someone threatens significant permanent or long term harm, and there is no reliable alternative method of preventing it. This postion obviously requires further refinement (i.e. closer definitions of terms) but I think it is a good starting point for debate.

[Thanatos]

Actions alone aren't immoral, it's the intent behind them that matters.

[Alkarin]

killing is the way nature works. if no one animal was hostle towards its inter species or intra species their would be no evolutionary progression, now if your only considering between a man and a man i personally believe it is justified in some cases

[Salazar]

IMO, killing is inherently wrong, but it can be neccessary to achieve a greater "right" that outweighs it.
Killing causes damage and harm, as such it's bad, but if you kill someone because you know that he plans to kill 100 innocent people, the action as a whole isnt evil, or wrong.

[Personified Boredom]

I like my crazy little Ukranian neighbor. If he could, he would slaughter every Russian he came across. He reminds of what I imagine our ancestors would have been like. You know, the bronze and iron age types; 'If you ain't from around here, it's either be about your business then leave, or I'll cut your tripes out.'

That appeals to me for some reason.

On the other hand, up the street lives a super-pacifist. He's a cool dude. Either it's his natural state of being really calm or the amount of weed we he smokes that makes you want to give everybody a hug.

In other words, it's all relative.

Or we could all just smoke a wee bit o' fine green and I doubt there'd ever be another unnatural death.