-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What makes murder wrong?
- Thread starter Druidus
- Start date
Neo-Logic
Reality Checker
What if the boy was born 8 legged and had the face of a spider. What if the old man could levitate from constant flatulence. Oh the what if's.Druidus said:
Well ... the new given circumstances call for more information such as the job of the old man versus the family and welath of the boy. Where they live and such because obviously with age comes experience, but with youth comes possiblities. If it was a villege for instance, then the old man could greatly rule the villegers with experience and all would benefit from it. However, the young boy, even if he was destined to die at 40, could help with the population increase, something the old man probably couldn't do without some "medical intervention" .. :biglaugh:
Stormygale
Member
I am not all christiany and stuff, but, one argument in the Word states that 'Thou shalt not kill.'
-
I can totally understand where this thread originated from. I can. Never thought about it though.
I have often considered what the term 'kill' actually means in that text. Killing can be any number of things. It is possible to kill someone with your mouth. To talk about them soooo much, that their person is killed out. Perhaps 'kill' is in reference to taking your own 'clean' soul and killing it by backsliding or throwing the mud-of-sin on it's velvety white surface. That in a sense could mean killing. Perhaps it means the killing of animals, however, the word also fights that by saying god filled the earth with beasts for meat. Dunno....but, from a scientific view it is a good argument.
Laws have been passed, from the beginning of time to cast a bad light on murder. It is under the preservation of oneself, meaning no one should be allowed to just come up and take away your 'choice' to live.
That leads up to my final point. Murder is totally legal. Didn't you know that!!!! OMG!!!
Abortion goes on everyday of your life.
-
I can totally understand where this thread originated from. I can. Never thought about it though.
I have often considered what the term 'kill' actually means in that text. Killing can be any number of things. It is possible to kill someone with your mouth. To talk about them soooo much, that their person is killed out. Perhaps 'kill' is in reference to taking your own 'clean' soul and killing it by backsliding or throwing the mud-of-sin on it's velvety white surface. That in a sense could mean killing. Perhaps it means the killing of animals, however, the word also fights that by saying god filled the earth with beasts for meat. Dunno....but, from a scientific view it is a good argument.
Laws have been passed, from the beginning of time to cast a bad light on murder. It is under the preservation of oneself, meaning no one should be allowed to just come up and take away your 'choice' to live.
That leads up to my final point. Murder is totally legal. Didn't you know that!!!! OMG!!!
Abortion goes on everyday of your life.
EnhancedSpirit
High Priestess
My quick answer is that what you do comes back on you. Not just the killing of the person, but all the pain you caused by your actions, all that will come back to you, one way or another. By hurting others, you are only hurting yourself.
john313
warrior-poet
Peace,
Murder is not wrong by itself, it is the intent with which it is done that makes it wrong or right. If done to save lives it is not wrong. if done with evil intentions or to harm others it is wrong. It is wrong because we are here to evolve our soul to a higher level and to do that we need to make love the basis for our actions, not hate or evil. If we are to kill someone, we could be taing away their chance to evolve their soul and condemning them to unnecessarily live an extra life in this world when they could have been almost ready to evolve to a "higher being" or on a quest for knowledge. By killing someone with evil intentions we are going against the very reason we exist. Following man's laws does not matter, we must follow the laws of nature, the laws of God.
I might not know what i am talking about though.
Murder is not wrong by itself, it is the intent with which it is done that makes it wrong or right. If done to save lives it is not wrong. if done with evil intentions or to harm others it is wrong. It is wrong because we are here to evolve our soul to a higher level and to do that we need to make love the basis for our actions, not hate or evil. If we are to kill someone, we could be taing away their chance to evolve their soul and condemning them to unnecessarily live an extra life in this world when they could have been almost ready to evolve to a "higher being" or on a quest for knowledge. By killing someone with evil intentions we are going against the very reason we exist. Following man's laws does not matter, we must follow the laws of nature, the laws of God.
I might not know what i am talking about though.
Fluffy
A fool
Druidus, have you been able to argue that anything is wrong from a secular view? Also have you been able to find an objective morality on anything?
Morals need belief and assumption, you cannot seperate them. And before any atheist jumps on me, my defintion of belief and assumption is very liberal.
Morals need belief and assumption, you cannot seperate them. And before any atheist jumps on me, my defintion of belief and assumption is very liberal.
Druidus
Keeper of the Grove
Fluffy, the only reason I came up with, from a secular point of view, is that it is an inherent factor in evolved societies that murder would be wrong. For the society to survive, it needs stability, and stability is lost if murders are allowed. Therefore, the urge to murder is taken out of most of us.
Mathematician
Reason, and reason again
Without life, none of us would be here so to protect individual life, we need a society that finds killing wrong. If we didn't, human life would struggle to exist. This can also be used for other crimes. Emphasis around life can be the building block of an entire society. Stealing is, essentially, taking something away from that person's life. Raping is, essentially, taking something away from his/her life. So on and so forth.
A selfish viewpoint, but thankfully, society has grown (for the most part) to the point where we respect eachother.
A selfish viewpoint, but thankfully, society has grown (for the most part) to the point where we respect eachother.
Hare Krishna
I am very sorry, if my comment will not fit in this discussion very well but I want to give a spiritual viewpoint anyway.
First of all because one is not the material body but the spirit soul within the body although you think that you are killing the person that is not true. Neither he who thinks the living entity the slayer nor he who thinks it slain is in knowledge, for the self slays not nor is slain. For the soul there is neither birth nor death at any time. He has not come into being, does not come into being, and will not come into being. He is unborn, eternal, ever-existing and primeval. He is not slain when the body is slain.
So, the question is what is then the criminal act to kill the body. One could even say that according to the above statements one can kill the material bodies and still not become punished at all.
Wow. Well, let's give an example. You are living in your home and someone comes and sets fire at your house...so you have to leave the not anymore inhabitable living place. Was that a criminal activity to to destroy your house? Obviously yes. So, similarly if one destroys someones material body making it uninhabitable for the soul, that is also a criminal activity. And if not the government then the material nature under the direction of God will certainly punish the criminal either in this life or in the next life. Eye for eye, teeth for teeth. This is the unavoidable law of nature.
However, if somebody is a criminal, murderer and takes to chanting of Hare Krishna the laws of nature will not punish that person. Why? The material nature is under the control of God, Krishna and one who takes shelter of Krishna will certainly be protected by Krishna.
Please chant Hare Krishna and be happy.
Nitai
I am very sorry, if my comment will not fit in this discussion very well but I want to give a spiritual viewpoint anyway.
First of all because one is not the material body but the spirit soul within the body although you think that you are killing the person that is not true. Neither he who thinks the living entity the slayer nor he who thinks it slain is in knowledge, for the self slays not nor is slain. For the soul there is neither birth nor death at any time. He has not come into being, does not come into being, and will not come into being. He is unborn, eternal, ever-existing and primeval. He is not slain when the body is slain.
So, the question is what is then the criminal act to kill the body. One could even say that according to the above statements one can kill the material bodies and still not become punished at all.
Wow. Well, let's give an example. You are living in your home and someone comes and sets fire at your house...so you have to leave the not anymore inhabitable living place. Was that a criminal activity to to destroy your house? Obviously yes. So, similarly if one destroys someones material body making it uninhabitable for the soul, that is also a criminal activity. And if not the government then the material nature under the direction of God will certainly punish the criminal either in this life or in the next life. Eye for eye, teeth for teeth. This is the unavoidable law of nature.
However, if somebody is a criminal, murderer and takes to chanting of Hare Krishna the laws of nature will not punish that person. Why? The material nature is under the control of God, Krishna and one who takes shelter of Krishna will certainly be protected by Krishna.
Please chant Hare Krishna and be happy.
Nitai
i think murder is wrong except for two reasons.
1. if it means your own survival i.e. someone who is trying to take you out in that moment when it literly means them or you.
2. if someone hurts your children i.e. raped them, severly beat and or tortured them while they are young
1. if it means your own survival i.e. someone who is trying to take you out in that moment when it literly means them or you.
2. if someone hurts your children i.e. raped them, severly beat and or tortured them while they are young
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
Murder can't be proven wrong in all situations. Such as mercy killing. That has to do with the whole pro-life and right-to-die arguments. To kill a good person (good being defined as a role citizen, volunteers time to good causes, donates to several charities, etc.) can be seen as wrong because it is harming not just the murdered victim, but everyone that was helped by the murder victime. Harming people is wrong because it makes thier life harder. Thier only life, being miserable because someone killed someone that made it easier.
To kill the average joe (the normal person, has a spouse, a kid or two, car payment, morgage or rent payment, etc.) could be seen as wrong, because again it is harming many people. The average joe will more than likly be the provider for the family. So, monetarily, the family will not have much, making thier life harder.
Killing the bad citizens (bad being thieves, gang members, etc.) can be wrong because thier is always a possibility that thier life will be completly turned around.
To kill the average joe (the normal person, has a spouse, a kid or two, car payment, morgage or rent payment, etc.) could be seen as wrong, because again it is harming many people. The average joe will more than likly be the provider for the family. So, monetarily, the family will not have much, making thier life harder.
Killing the bad citizens (bad being thieves, gang members, etc.) can be wrong because thier is always a possibility that thier life will be completly turned around.
Unedited
Active Member
As a species, human beings, under all our intelligence, our emotions, and our spirituallity, are just trying to survive. Every action is driven by the need to keep our species alive. Murder, for the most part, goes against that need.
First, you have to keep yourself alive, which is why, given a situation of self-defense where someone has to die, a person would normally choose themselves. Second, you have to contribute to the continuation of society. The most obvious way would be to have children, but there are so many other ways too, most of which contribute to the advancement of our society. This is why some feel it is okay to murder someone who threatens our children or our society.
One murder isn't going to be the downfall of our species, but if murder was "right" then everyone would be doing it and that would certaintly decrease our population. So, to stay alive, we view even one murder as going against the survival of our species.
Or at least that was the best reason I could come up with.
First, you have to keep yourself alive, which is why, given a situation of self-defense where someone has to die, a person would normally choose themselves. Second, you have to contribute to the continuation of society. The most obvious way would be to have children, but there are so many other ways too, most of which contribute to the advancement of our society. This is why some feel it is okay to murder someone who threatens our children or our society.
One murder isn't going to be the downfall of our species, but if murder was "right" then everyone would be doing it and that would certaintly decrease our population. So, to stay alive, we view even one murder as going against the survival of our species.
Or at least that was the best reason I could come up with.
Hare Krishna
The Vedas tell us that there are six kinds of aggressors: (1) a poison giver, (2) one who sets fire to the house, (3) one who attacks with deadly weapons, (4) one who plunders riches, (5) one who occupies anothers land, and (6) one who kidnaps a wife. Such aggressors are at once to be killed, and no sin is incurred by killing such aggressors.
The explanation why is this killing of an aggressor good is - you kill one man, an aggressor, and then others who would like to do the same mischief will be restrained to do the same mischief. Thus killing of the six types of aggressors have rectifying effect of criminal mentality. Nowadays of course this is not followed because of humanstic feelings and people are just put into the jail where usually they have very nice time. In some countries the jails are like hotels. There is a TV in each prison, special diets if required, playgrounds etc. Some criminals commit again and again some mischief because they like nice prison life. But what is even worst, the free criminals who are not in the jail are not discouraged but rather encouraged to do mischief. Anyway, the good purpose of killing few people is therefor, that you get peace in the society. And of course, If you could get all the people to chant any of the holy names of God like Allah, Jehova, Hare Krishna or whatever then all traces of criminal mentality would disappear. IOW a religious men develops all good qualities including non-violence, compassion and mercy to everybody. So, how he/she would commit any criminal activity?
Please chant Hare Krishna and be happy
Nitai
The Vedas tell us that there are six kinds of aggressors: (1) a poison giver, (2) one who sets fire to the house, (3) one who attacks with deadly weapons, (4) one who plunders riches, (5) one who occupies anothers land, and (6) one who kidnaps a wife. Such aggressors are at once to be killed, and no sin is incurred by killing such aggressors.
The explanation why is this killing of an aggressor good is - you kill one man, an aggressor, and then others who would like to do the same mischief will be restrained to do the same mischief. Thus killing of the six types of aggressors have rectifying effect of criminal mentality. Nowadays of course this is not followed because of humanstic feelings and people are just put into the jail where usually they have very nice time. In some countries the jails are like hotels. There is a TV in each prison, special diets if required, playgrounds etc. Some criminals commit again and again some mischief because they like nice prison life. But what is even worst, the free criminals who are not in the jail are not discouraged but rather encouraged to do mischief. Anyway, the good purpose of killing few people is therefor, that you get peace in the society. And of course, If you could get all the people to chant any of the holy names of God like Allah, Jehova, Hare Krishna or whatever then all traces of criminal mentality would disappear. IOW a religious men develops all good qualities including non-violence, compassion and mercy to everybody. So, how he/she would commit any criminal activity?
Please chant Hare Krishna and be happy
Nitai
EnhancedSpirit
High Priestess
Interesting quote: Moral Judgements
You are not bound by any ethical rules. Consider any moral rule, which without loss of generality I shall assume is of the prescriptive form "Thou shalt do X". (Proscriptive rules can be expressed by making X negative, so that e.g. "Thou shalt not commit murder" can be expressed as "Thou shalt refrain from committing murder".) In order to obey the rule, "Thou shalt do X", you must make the decision to obey it. But that decision is a free choice, and is not dictated by the rule itself. Therefore you are not bound by a moral rule (as you are bound by, say, the laws of physics).
Saying that something is morally wrong is essentially an expression of one's act of willing that nobody should do it (unless there is some other, over-riding reason). It is a thus a public, rather than private, preference, in so far as it is intended to apply to everybody, not just oneself. One can find an adumbration of this theory in Thomas Hobbes, where he says that a law is just if a rational being would will that everyone should obey it. My claim is that we say a rule is morally right if we will that everybody obey it.
You are not bound by any ethical rules. Consider any moral rule, which without loss of generality I shall assume is of the prescriptive form "Thou shalt do X". (Proscriptive rules can be expressed by making X negative, so that e.g. "Thou shalt not commit murder" can be expressed as "Thou shalt refrain from committing murder".) In order to obey the rule, "Thou shalt do X", you must make the decision to obey it. But that decision is a free choice, and is not dictated by the rule itself. Therefore you are not bound by a moral rule (as you are bound by, say, the laws of physics).
Saying that something is morally wrong is essentially an expression of one's act of willing that nobody should do it (unless there is some other, over-riding reason). It is a thus a public, rather than private, preference, in so far as it is intended to apply to everybody, not just oneself. One can find an adumbration of this theory in Thomas Hobbes, where he says that a law is just if a rational being would will that everyone should obey it. My claim is that we say a rule is morally right if we will that everybody obey it.
Hare Krishna
The following statement is quite interesting: "it is an inherent factor in evolved societies that murder would be wrong. For the society to survive, it needs stability, and stability is lost if murders are allowed. Therefore, the urge to murder is taken out of most of us."
In reality it seems its different. I was a bit googling and became very surprised that the rates of murders are increasing all over the world. Then I suddenly remembered the Vedic predictions that already before 5000 years ago described this situation. The explanation why, is because of increasing materialism. Anyway, an interesting point to think about.
Please, chant Hare Krishna and be happy.
Nitai
The following statement is quite interesting: "it is an inherent factor in evolved societies that murder would be wrong. For the society to survive, it needs stability, and stability is lost if murders are allowed. Therefore, the urge to murder is taken out of most of us."
In reality it seems its different. I was a bit googling and became very surprised that the rates of murders are increasing all over the world. Then I suddenly remembered the Vedic predictions that already before 5000 years ago described this situation. The explanation why, is because of increasing materialism. Anyway, an interesting point to think about.
Please, chant Hare Krishna and be happy.
Nitai
Fluffy
A fool
That doesn't make something wrong though. Just because the majority of societies have come up with something doesn't mean we shouldn't do it. The majority of societies have decided that homosexuality is morally wrong but I don't agree with that and I refuse to believe that my opinion is wrong simply because it is in the minority if you see what I mean.
What you are talking about is whether something is valid practically. This is not morality.
Faminedynasty
Active Member
It is true that it cannot be proven wrong in all situations. But it seems a pretty self-evident principle of any coherent moral philosophy that it is wrong to impose your will on someone else, violating their right to life, their will, harming them etc. It has to do with equality. You are a person, a single individual, and what right do you have (assuming they are being peaceful, not trying to kill you) to destroy another person against their will? Who are you to impose your will of destruction over their will to live? It is the same principle that makes rape morally wrong.
I am going to go back to my old argument of drop 20 brainwashed people on a desert island - leave them alone, and within a short time, the ten Comandments (maybe excepting the ones referring to our behaviour in respect of G-d) will emerge - man's basest instinct is survival (smeone else- sorry can't remember who) made this point.
A society must declare taking another's life as 'wrong', simply for the prevention of the 'leader' of the that group.
If I was on that Island, and found myself to be a better fighter than the rest - I would make sure no one could murder me. If no one could murder me, I would have to diguise the rule by applying it to all of the group - that is the only way that they would accept it. And why is that ? because if anything happened to me, the 'job' i had would be left open for the next strongest guy - and he would want that protection too.
That is why I made the earlier answer "because it is illegal" - I should have elaborated.
A society must declare taking another's life as 'wrong', simply for the prevention of the 'leader' of the that group.
If I was on that Island, and found myself to be a better fighter than the rest - I would make sure no one could murder me. If no one could murder me, I would have to diguise the rule by applying it to all of the group - that is the only way that they would accept it. And why is that ? because if anything happened to me, the 'job' i had would be left open for the next strongest guy - and he would want that protection too.
That is why I made the earlier answer "because it is illegal" - I should have elaborated.