Harm None

[SalixIncendium]

There are religions that teach the tenet to "harm none" is some form or another. Two religions that come to mind are Jainism and Wicca. I'm confident there are more that teach this tenet to varying degrees.

I think we can agree that the vast majority of humankind has the morality to not kill living beings meaninglessly or without purpose. However, where does one draw the line on what one is permitted to kill without violating this tenet?

We can look at in in opposing extremes. Most will agree that killing another human being because he or she makes your your life difficult is morally wrong. However, when faced with bacterial infection such as bronchitis or sinusitis, most have no issue killing off the bacteria.

Then we can look at lesser extremes. Is it morally acceptable to put a murderer to death? An unwanted fetus? A mouse that has gotten into your home? A bee because we're afraid it will sting? A mosquito who is tapping your blood? Bacteria that caused illness? Mold spores that grew in a moist part of your home?

When, if at all, in your opinion, is it morally acceptable to kill? What living creatures can be acceptably killed without causal consequence*?


ETA: By causal consequence, I'm referring to consequences to the person doing the harm, such as repercussions in the form of punishment from your respective god.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

When, if at all, in your opinion, is it morally acceptable to kill? What living creatures can be acceptably killed without causal consequence?

although I'm not certain what you mean by "causal consequence, I'm interpreting it as meaning that killing A results in consequences x, y, and/or z--that is, one can expect no consequences for their act of killing. My responses:

1) It is morally acceptable to kill for survival. There may be cases where it might be acceptable when survival is not at stake.
2) There are always a causal consequences when killing, period, whether acceptable or no.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

When, if at all, in your opinion, is it morally acceptable to kill? What living creatures can be acceptably killed without causal consequence?

Bed bugs. That you mention infections is interesting, because we seem "too willing" to kill bacteria and viruses and are making them treatment resistant as a consequence. Mold spores could be said to potentially pose a risk to those in your care (as well as your own self), so I would think that is good enough reason to kill it. The same goes for mosquitoes. Myself, I love seafood too much to give up killing that for food. Anything else, I do my best not to kill.
And, seriously, kill bed bugs on site soon as you see them, or else you'll find yourself wondering if the most devout of Jains could adhere to their strict vows of non-violence in the face of such a stress-inducing pest that is exceedingly difficult to get rid of.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Got me thinking, even for a vegetarian/vegan meal, things needed to have died. So, I guess ultimately then, to survive is to kill. Inherently.

 

[SalixIncendium]

although I'm not certain what you mean by "causal consequence, I'm interpreting it as meaning that killing A results in consequences x, y, and/or z--that is, one can expect no consequences for their act of killing. My responses:

1) It is morally acceptable to kill for survival. There may be cases where it might be acceptable when survival is not at stake.
2) There are always a causal consequences when killing, period, whether acceptable or no.

Apologies for not being more specific with regard to causal consequence. I am referring to causal consequence to the person doing the harm more than I am universal causal consequence. I'll edit the OP to reflect this.

You state that it's morally acceptable to kill for survival, but then go onto say it may be acceptable to kill when survival is not at stake. Let's examine this...

Bed bugs. That you mention infections is interesting, because we seem "too willing" to kill bacteria and viruses and are making them treatment resistant as a consequence. Mold spores could be said to potentially pose a risk to those in your care (as well as your own self), so I would think that is good enough reason to kill it. The same goes for mosquitoes. Myself, I love seafood too much to give up killing that for food. Anything else, I do my best not to kill.
And, seriously, kill bed bugs on site soon as you see them, or else you'll find yourself wondering if the most devout of Jains could adhere to their strict vows of non-violence in the face of such a stress-inducing pest that is exceedingly difficult to get rid of.

Looking at @Shadow Wolf's example of bed bugs, would killing these be acceptable because they are a nuisance? Where would you draw the line? Would it be acceptable to kill a coyote or deer because it was eating the food in your garden? A raccoon because it's getting into your garbage every week? Where is your line drawn? Are there different "karmic" consequences for whatever class of being whose life you are ending?

 

[SalixIncendium]

Got me thinking, even for a vegetarian/vegan meal, things needed to have died. So, I guess ultimately then, to survive is to kill. Inherently.

Not necessarily. One can harvest the fruit of a plant, take unfertilized eggs from the hen, take milk from the cow, etc. without killing.

 

[McBell]

Looking at @Shadow Wolf's example of bed bugs, would killing these be acceptable because they are a nuisance?

Killing bed bugs is acceptable because it prevents a health risk.

Where would you draw the line?

I just drew a line....

Would it be acceptable to kill a coyote or deer because it was eating the food in your garden?

Yes

A raccoon because it's getting into your garbage every week?

Yes

Where is your line drawn?

I follow the line drawn by the law.
And I will flat out say that I sometimes disagree with where that line is placed.

Are there different "karmic" consequences for whatever class of being whose life you are ending?

I have not seen anything that leads me to believe that "karma" exists outside the imagination of those who believe it.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I follow the line drawn by the law.
And I will flat out say that I sometimes disagree with where that line is placed.

Can you share an example of a line placement that you are in disagreement with that is still within your moral standards?

 

[McBell]

Can you share an example of a line placement that you are in disagreement with that is still within your moral standards?

In my county feral cats are legally still cats and have to be live captured in order to remove them.
In the next county over, feral cats are legally considered rodents and do not have to be live captured.

 

[SalixIncendium]

In my county feral cats are legally still cats and have to be live captured in order to remove them.
In the next county over, feral cats are legally considered rodents and do not have to be live captured.

*blinks* Um, rodents aren't even of the same order as cats.

But I digress. Where are you on the moral compass of this subject? Do you think one of these counties has it right? Why?

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Apologies for not being more specific with regard to causal consequence. I am referring to causal consequence to the person doing the harm more than I am universal causal consequence. I'll edit the OP to reflect this.

You state that it's morally acceptable to kill for survival, but then go onto say it may be acceptable to kill when survival is not at stake. Let's examine this...



Looking at @Shadow Wolf's example of bed bugs, would killing these be acceptable because they are a nuisance? Where would you draw the line? Would it be acceptable to kill a coyote or deer because it was eating the food in your garden? A raccoon because it's getting into your garbage every week? Where is your line drawn? Are there different "karmic" consequences for whatever class of being whose life you are ending?

Those questions cover an awful lot of ground...lines in the sand, many of them for different circumstances...sometimes different ways of looking at the problem...

would I kill a raccoon that gets into my garbage every week? No, I would change my garbage can so that it couldn't get in. I have to take responsibility on my end of the equation to make killing unnecessary when and where possible.

would I kill a coyote or deer because it's eating food from my garden? Again, I would try to set up my garden (as I have done in many past years) in ways that would discourage such raiding. However, I also believe that other species have a right to exist, and sharing a little of my crops might not be a poor exchange for the things that deer and coyotes provide for the local ecosystem, which benefits me both directly and indirectly. However, because we humans have screwed up the local ecosystem (well, the global ecosystem, in fact), if someone does not do something to control the population of deer, like hunting, there will be more problems down the line. If no coyotes, lots of rabbits, squirrels and other rodents; too many deer per square mile leads to the stripping of all vegetation from the ground up to about six feet, with disease and starvation eventually thinning the herds. I personally have hunted, but do not currently hunt. If I do, it is for food. As an animist, I ask permission, make offerings, and treat the objects of my hunt with respect.

Yeah, bed bugs and other insects and arachnids in the house...we either kill or escort outside. I try not to spray too often, because it harms good as well as bad species, and birds and other local fauna often depend on them...but still, I ask permission, make offerings, and try to treat my pests with respect...

bacteria, etc.,...yeah, life's a struggle. We Western humans use antibiotics too often and for the wrong reasons, and our opponents evolve to get at us anyway. It happens; and there are consequences in real life (resistant bacteria).

As for karma--I just don't know. I think we do have multiple lives, in different forms...there are lots of interesting ideas, but precious little "objective" evidence. Yes, your experiences follow you through these lives in various ways, in my opinion.

When might it be necessary to kill other than food and self defense? As I said, I kill rodents and insects inside and around the house, because I prefer to live in a relatively critter-free home. I kill plants that grow where I don't want them. I take antibiotics and other medicines to combat pathogens that might make me sick, but mostly wouldn't kill me.

For humans, I don't think there are lots of situations where killing others is okay, but there are some: those who have repeatedly harmed other humans may be subject to community imposed sanctions, up to and including death--but that should always be the last resort, and society should really try harder to turn people from such antisocial behavior rather than punishing and executing...really, that doesn't work very well...but even the most reprehensible unrepentant serial killer should be shown respect and be given real opportunities to atone for what they have done. But there are sometimes when someone just needs killed...but that shouldn't be up to an individual to decide, it should be the community, through whatever law and order system there is.

 

[Jesster]

I just killed something right now. Some bacteria just messed with the wrong white blood cell. I know I'm okay with that at the very least. I'm hardcore like that though.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Looking at @Shadow Wolf's example of bed bugs, would killing these be acceptable because they are a nuisance?

They are more than a nuisance. They don't carry disease, but you'll get an insatiable and intense itch, your skin looks terrible and can scar, you'll loose sleep, they induce lots of stress, they spread easily, and though easy to kill they are extremely difficult to get rid of.

Not necessarily. One can harvest the fruit of a plant, take unfertilized eggs from the hen, take milk from the cow, etc. without killing.

That fruit is still living tissue. You can't live on milk and eggs, and vegans don't eat them.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

*blinks* Um, rodents aren't even of the same order as cats.

But I digress. Where are you on the moral compass of this subject? Do you think one of these counties has it right? Why?

I'm curious as to what your opinion on dealing with invasive animals might be like. (I acknowledge that different examples might have different results. Like the Guam python vs the lionfish.)

 

[SalixIncendium]

I'm curious as to what your opinion on dealing with invasive animals might be like. (I acknowledge that different examples might have different results. Like the Guam python vs the lionfish.)

When I encounter an invasive animal, I do my best to "catch and release" with no harm to myself or that animal. However, if I assess that harm is imminent, I will take whatever action necessary to protect myself and mine.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

When I encounter an invasive animal, I do my best to "catch and release" with no harm to myself or that animal. However, if I assess that harm is imminent, I will take whatever action necessary to protect myself and mine.

I'm strongly in favor of spay/neuter programs for feral cats. But for something like the anacondas and Burmese pythons in the everglade there's nowhere safe to release them so culling is always on the table.
Which is sad because I really like snakes but they're so destructive to native turtles, gators and birds that it becomes a balancing equation.

 

[McBell]

*blinks* Um, rodents aren't even of the same order as cats.

But I digress. Where are you on the moral compass of this subject? Do you think one of these counties has it right? Why?

The neighboring county has it right.
The fines, fees, etc. for feral cats is ridiculous given the strict regulations on how to handle the situation.