Subject:
|
Re: Are we doing the right thing?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:25:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
812 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> I disagree. Any people should use whatever methods they have at their disposal
> to secure a fair measure of life. To do less is to accept slavery. If their
> only recourse is terrorism, then their neighbors damn well need to help solve
> their problems (or snuff them).
Chris:
With all due respect, I take personal moral umbrage with this statement. You
and I have already well-established that our world-views diverge just about as
much as any two humans' world-views can, but, I think that this idea is still
well worth debating.
This is about principles and consistency: Resorting to the destruction and
murder of innocent non-combatants is butchery and moral wretchedness of the
grossest sort (and this goes for Israeli gun-ships launching missles into
Palestinian neighborhoods as much as it does for Palestinian suicide bombers.)
Striving for a fair measure of life is reasonable and just; striving for a fair
measure of life by murdering innocents is to become as bad or worse than those
who have wronged you.
Fighting against slavery by becoming a butcher, a moral coward, and a filthy
devil may free one from slavery of the body, but in so doing it destroys that
person's conscience and moral sensibilities. The moral high ground, the morally
praise-worthy struggle is one that does not victimize non-combatants and/or the
innocent, but which instead allows human decency to thrive. Those struggles
which are carried out under a banner of moral indignation yet moral conscience
and restraint - the Civil Rights Movement of Martin Luther King and Mahatma
Ghandi - have not only been an instrument of freedom for those involved, but
have in invaluable ways elevated the moral sensibilities of all humanity.
I personally (and with no offense intended, but in the spirit of amiacable
debate, which is the purpose of this forum) completely and utterly reject your
statement. Humanity is better than that - and if we're not, we should be, and
indeed we *must* be. I hope to become a slave myself before I stoop so low as
to murder the innocent for the sake of my own personal liberties.
This does not mean that I am a pacifist; on the contrary, some things are worth
fighting for, and fighting for very hard. Liberty and freedom of the oppressed
is one of them. Kill the enemy soldier who would enslave your people. Kill him
on the battlefield where armed and equal men meet. But even in that, do not
cross the line of moral corruption - do not torture him, and allow him his life
if he throws down his arms and begs you for it. But a line, in all things, even
in justifiable rage, exists.
Chris, God help us all if your just measure of life is threatened.
Respectfully, but Sincerely,
James Simpson
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Are we doing the right thing?
|
| (...) disposal (...) OK. (...) But I believe that principles are inconsistent at their heart. (...) If you, your children and the bus driver are trapped under an avalanche and your children are starving, do you kill and serve the driver to avoid (...) (23 years ago, 5-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Are we doing the right thing?
|
| First, Lindsay, I don't want to gush, but I really just love reading your stuff. Your only problem is that you're too sporadic. :-) Do you teach like this? Or does the nature of the college classroom require the lecture to be generally dry? Most (...) (23 years ago, 2-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
50 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
