Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

When (if ever) is it considered okay to kill, this question poped up at school today and i was wondering what your views on that matter where.
-I ran a search and couldnt find anything if their is one already out thr, sry just send me the link so i can view ur thoughts in there.

I assume you mean killing humans, so here it goes. In my opinion it is allowed in a 'legal war' (legal war qualifies as protection from an aggressor) and it is allowed as means of revolution. In a revolution 'the people' can kill the ruler/ruling class. it's important to stress the fact that it's 'the people' not just one individual.

Those are the only two cases in which killing is acceptable - I still don't support it in those cases, but I do see it as acceptable-

To protect someone or yourself in a kill or be killed type of situation.

Other than that there is no good reason to kill.

It is never 'okay' to kill -not anything, not even an ant. There are many times when it is neccessary or unpreventable though.

In terms of wardare/violence in general, retaliation is necessary at any and all times when you or anyone under your protection is threatened or assaulted. It is also necessary when the value of what you stand for and believe in is threatened to a point where it is jeopardized. Retaliation does not directly mean physical attack, it means defense and or action.

Killing should never be first choice, and if other alternatives are available, they should be used -but it cannot sometimes be avoided. In war sadly, people are sometimes misguided by nationalistic or proganda influences -or the army is their job, so those people end up fighting and dying for nothing, which is why there should be less lethal weapons in warfare -but killing is still justified if neccessary.

Originally posted by darkjedi132
When (if ever) is it considered okay to kill, this question poped up at school today and i was wondering what your views on that matter where.
-I ran a search and couldnt find anything if their is one already out thr, sry just send me the link so i can view ur thoughts in there.

Never.

To prevent a killing is the only time it is acceptable to kill.

Originally posted by Help
To prevent a killing is the only time it is acceptable to kill.

It's seems rather paradoxal to kill to save a life.

of course its okay, kill all you want.

Originally posted by ~Forever*Alone~
of course its okay, kill all you want.

to me.....

killing is acceptable for....

- survival. killing is an instinct present in all animal life. killing to eat, killing to avoid death or just killing to eliminate competition for those resources you need to survive. In today's society the first and last are moot........but if our society were to crumble do to a global catastrophe of some kind, you'd better believe they would be practiced again.

- to prevent harm. If someone is attacking myself or another person......killing is ok. I'm not just talking kill or be killed. No person has the right to harm another person in any way, even if only breaking an arm. Any person who actively seeks to hurt others without provocation is fair game......our society does not need them.

- vengeance.

Originally posted by Evil Dead
to me.....

killing is acceptable for....

- survival. killing is an instinct present in all animal life. killing to eat, killing to avoid death or just killing to eliminate competition for those resources you need to survive. In today's society the first and last are moot........but if our society were to crumble do to a global catastrophe of some kind, you'd better believe they would be practiced again.

- to prevent harm. If someone is attacking myself or another person......killing is ok. I'm not just talking kill or be killed. No person has the right to harm another person in any way, even if only breaking an arm. Any person who actively seeks to hurt others without provocation is fair game......our society does not need them.

- vengeance.

Your second part, killing to prevent harm, is in direct conflict with the first part, killing to eliminate competition. I'm not saying that you are incorrect, just that there is a conflict. Maybe a better way to state the second part is to say that I protect all who are part of my family, because they help me survive. However, everyone else is competition. Now it all depends on how you define "family" or community or country.

I fail to see the contradiction......

I, Jeff......Evil Dead...whatever would kill to prevent harm from coming to whomever I did not wish to be harmed. At present, I would do as much damage as the laws allow but without the presence of law.......I would just straight up kill them. Also, I would kill competition if I ever felt my survival or survival of any person I cared about were in doubt due to others competing for resources I need to survive.

I don't see a contradiction.........2 completely seperate reasons I would kill.......

When you're really, really mad.

Originally posted by Evil Dead
I fail to see the contradiction......

I, Jeff......Evil Dead...whatever would kill to prevent harm from coming to whomever I did not wish to be harmed. At present, I would do as much damage as the laws allow but without the presence of law.......I would just straight up kill them. Also, I would kill competition if I ever felt my survival or survival of any person I cared about were in doubt due to others competing for resources I need to survive.

I don't see a contradiction.........2 completely seperate reasons I would kill.......

I didn't say contradiction, I said conflict.

Someone might try to kill someone you protect because that person was competition, you then kill them. Someone kills you because you killed the other person. That is conflict.

Originally posted by darkjedi132
When (if ever) is it considered okay to kill, this question poped up at school today and i was wondering what your views on that matter where.
-I ran a search and couldnt find anything if their is one already out thr, sry just send me the link so i can view ur thoughts in there.

It's okay to kill when I'm hungry.

If I feel like having steak or hamburgers for dinner. It's perfectly fine for the butcher to kill the cow.



*beep* that! I want something juicy and tender.

that is nature. I do what I have to do.......that other person does what he has to do. May the best man win. Natural selection.

Originally posted by Evil Dead
that is nature. I do what I have to do.......that other person does what he has to do. May the best man win. Natural selection.

But you are missing my point. This conflict is why it is not ok to kill sometimes and ok to kill in others. To survive we need to cooperate. If we kill each other, we all die.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But you are missing my point. This conflict is why it is not ok to kill sometimes and ok to kill in others. To survive we need to cooperate. If we kill each other, we all die.

because you took two different scenerios and are comparing the justification in each when it doesn't apply...

I said it was okay to kill for survival, kill competitors for resources to keep yourself alive if this world ever came to that point again.......natural selection.

I also stated it was okay to kill who attempt harm unprovoked in our current society in which natural selection plays no parts. Our suvival is not based on competition for resources.

That's why it is okay to kill sometimes and not others. If it's necissary for one's survival, it's ok. If it's not necissary for one's survival and is unprovoked, it's not ok.

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
It is never 'okay' to kill -not anything, not even an ant. There are many times when it is neccessary or unpreventable though.

In terms of wardare/violence in general, retaliation is necessary at any and all times when you or anyone under your protection is threatened or assaulted. It is also necessary when the value of what you stand for and believe in is threatened to a point where it is jeopardized. Retaliation does not directly mean physical attack, it means defense and or action.

Killing should never be first choice, and if other alternatives are available, they should be used -but it cannot sometimes be avoided. In war sadly, people are sometimes misguided by nationalistic or proganda influences -or the army is their job, so those people end up fighting and dying for nothing, which is why there should be less lethal weapons in warfare -but killing is still justified if neccessary.

I agree with Black Ghost.

It's never okay to kill, but sometimes it must be done in self defense or when it is absolutely necessary.

i agree too, never ok but sometimes necisary or unavoidable, but i have no illusions that i could kill someone even though i believe that it is wrong. by that i mean if someone were to threaten to kill someone i loved or someone who was under my protection i could kill them, i could kill to save a life and i could proberbly kill to avenge a loved one.

Exactly



I do what I percieve to be "wrong" very often.

Originally posted by darkjedi132
When (if ever) is it considered okay to kill, this question poped up at school today and i was wondering what your views on that matter where.
-I ran a search and couldnt find anything if their is one already out thr, sry just send me the link so i can view ur thoughts in there. In self defense and this may sound strange to many but when it's consensual. As when a person tells or allows you to kill them. Or if a person commits an act after you have given them warning that you will kill them, that person should understand that his or her life is on the line.

do you mean euthanasia/assisted suicide? i agree with you about euthinasia. if someone has something that is fatal but thier death will be a drawn out possibly painful one and that is thier choice then they should be allowed to chooce if the live or die, and assisting someone in this is an act of mercy.
sorry if i went a bit off topic but i feel very strongly about this issue and if people who are going to die want to die sooner they should be allowed to end their suffering

Originally posted by midnightshadow
do you mean euthanasia/assisted suicide? i agree with you about euthinasia. if someone has something that is fatal but thier death will be a drawn out possibly painful one and that is thier choice then they should be allowed to chooce if the live or die, and assisting someone in this is an act of mercy.
sorry if i went a bit off topic but i feel very strongly about this issue and if people who are going to die want to die sooner they should be allowed to end their suffering For me the person does not need to be in any harm or have something fatal. If he/she wants to die and truly wants some one to off them, it should be okay. Of course I couldn't bring myself to kill some one just because they asked me(unfortunately, I wouldn't have the balls) but if I were in the shoes of the person who wants to die, I would want some one to do it for me.

It's OK in self-defence, war (they kinda go together), and when executing people who have killed for reasons other than these.

When you need to do it to do what is right, perhaps like in a war or when you kill someone that just causes problem to society. Like in a revolution if its for the best.

Reading a book titled "On Killing." It's about soldiers mainly (vietnam vets) and their tendency to have an innate aversion to killing another human being. These are men who are asked to kill solely for their country and most show a great reluctance to do it, even in actual combat.