A good example and one to remember if and when I run into a drunken black man in my house.
On Mar 15, 1:56 pm, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]> wrote: > Reading through this thread I can't help but reflect on the time I > lived in North Carolina. It was a saturday afternoon in the summer > time and my children were in the wreck room playing video games. I > happened to be upstairs working in the bathroom and my younger son ran > up and huried me downstairs saying a man had just walked into the back > door. I immediatly went for my shotgun! The truth is that I was pissed > that someone had the gall to walk right into my back door. I stoped > and realized that it was still daylight so I could not shoot him. When > I got to the wreck room I found a drunken middle aged black man > standing there who called me "brother" and wanted to give me a hug. I > in turn grabed him by the shoulders and turned back to face the door > and led him out. He exclaimed "Aw c'mon man you know me!" With that I > grabed his bike, which he was tripping over, and him by the back of > his shirt and led him out to the street. I told him to get on his > bike, ride away and don't come back. By this time my wife had already > called the police. The police returned later to tell me that they > found the man passed out on someone elses front porch cluching a nutty > buddy cone which had melted all over him. I didn't press charges and > the police brought him home after letting him sleep it off in the > "tank". > So my point; Had it been after sunset I could have shot that man > and it would have been ethically "OK" for me to kill him. If I had > shot him, it would not have been ethical before sunset but many would > say I was moraly correct in doing so because he posed an imminent > threat to my family and myself. Personaly I have no moral dilemas in > shooting someone if they do in fact pose imminant threat. If it had > been dark I would not have been able to properly asses the situation > and might have shot the man. That would hve been both ethically "OK" > and moraly acceptable in NC, USA. Personaly, knowing in full of the > cicumstances, I would have felt terrible if I had shot that man. > > On Mar 15, 11:37 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > So despite you asuranes that this is not an emotional response, I > > think it is so. > > > I would love to be able to say I would B, but who knows what would > > actualy happen. Just so that we are clear though. I hold no ideas > > about the sancticty of human life, I certianly do not belive in such a > > thing, and it is purel;y moral reasons I would like to say B and also > > has nowt to do with my own spirtuality. > > > The question though was not are their emotions involed in moral > > dilemers, it is clear that there are, but should there be? > > > You have not really answered this Slip, wanna have a go at doing so? > > > On 15 Mar, 15:33, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > We also had other discussions on the death penalty, a much divisive > > > topic where we might as well toss Religion in with the Moral and > > > Ethical issues. > > > > A man comes home and finds two of his children beheaded and beaten, > > > blood everywhere, he goes into the closet and gets his shotgun and > > > slowly walks up the stairs, where at the top he finds his wife > > > brutally murdered as well. He hears moaning and sobbing coming from > > > the bedroom and as he walks over he finds a strange man raping his > > > teenage daughter. The man sees him and jumps off the bed, puts his > > > hands up and says he's sorry, that he doesn't know what came over him > > > and says please don't kill me. > > > > What to do Lee; > > > > (A) Tell the stranger that you are going to get help for him to see if > > > he can be rehabilitated. > > > > (B) Explain that because of your moral and ethical values and your > > > religious beliefs you can't kill him but you will make sure that > > > instead he gets food and shelter and medical care for the rest of his > > > life in an institution. > > > > (C) BLAM BLAM Death Penalty immediately issued while ridding the > > > world of a demented piece of garbage who most likely wouldn't be > > > rehabilitated anyway and if escaped would go out and kill and rape > > > some more victims. Recidivism rates speak for themselves. > > > > I'd go with (C) and with a clear conscience. This nonsense about a > > > moral social conscience in regards to murderers is IMO, faulted > > > reasoning. We've better things to do with our society than support > > > murdering mental defectives. What are we trying to prove? Do we pat > > > ourselves on the back and claim we are a more advanced society because > > > we don't even kill those who kill us? Are we more religiously > > > righteous and heavenly bound? Should we pamper Pit Bulls as well > > > after they inflict a lethal attack on an innocent child? > > > Oh and do you think for one minute that I would let my daughter have a > > > baby if she became pregnant from an incident like that? I'd perform > > > the abortion myself if I had to. > > > > US Prisons house over 2 million inmates, according to outdated sources > > > and out of that population thousands are people I wouldn't spend 2 > > > seconds thinking about other than their riddance. What is > > > rehabilitation for a "lifer", rehabilitation for "what?". > > > > As of August 2009 the total prison population of the UK stood at > > > 93,574. That is a lot considering the size of the UK. > > > > We need to stop raising and nurturing criminals. China might have had > > > it right, chop their heads off in the public square, let the people > > > see that crime really doesn't pay. I'd be the first to buy a ticket > > > to the show, let the heads roll. > > > > BTW, I'm not emotion about this, I'm laughing while typing. lol > > > > On Mar 15, 7:13 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Heheh very strange what we all take as common knowldge isn't it. > > > > > I had always understood the diffrance between morality and ethics to > > > > be this. Morality is one personal definition on what is good or bad. > > > > Ethics is concerened with doing that which is right. So one > > > > descriptive and the other more concerned with the doing, or actions. > > > > > I had always had this in mind when talking about morality here. > > > > However a little while back, and by that I mean less than a year. We > > > > had another debate about morality, some questions where asked abotu > > > > what I mean when I say 'Moral' and when I say 'Ethical', it seemed > > > > that my ideas where just a little out and due to the helpfull people > > > > here I re thought teh definitions that i had always belived where > > > > correct. That is: > > > > > Morality is still ones personal opinion on what is good and what is > > > > bad, but Ethics deals with a more social morality. That is you and I > > > > could have differing ideas due to our morality, but our ethics come > > > > fro the society or other groupings we find ourselves in. > > > > > Now you say that this is also wrong? Hhahah gees, a little help > > > > anybody? > > > > > On 15 Mar, 11:54, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I disagree. Morality is not a personal decision but a communal one and > > > > > is not innate but taught by the family and society. Morals are loose > > > > > enough to change according to current trends and therefore not fixed- > > > > > they are a cousin to "situation ethics". > > > > > > On Mar 15, 6:31 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I think that is wrong mate. Morality is no more than ones personal > > > > > > definition of what is right and what is wrong. > > > > > > > On 14 Mar, 06:27, fiddler <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > And no: morals are not based on reason, ethics are based on > > > > > > > reason. > > > > > > > Morals are the "spiritual " measure of right and wrong and ethics > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > the intellectual/societal force that makes living in groups > > > > > > > possible. > > > > > > > > Ethics are what we get when we apply logic and concern for others > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > ourselves. Morals come from illiterate bronze and iron age > > > > > > > paedophiles > > > > > > > and misogynists in silly little collections of quaint tribal > > > > > > > stories. > > > > > > > > On Mar 13, 4:32 pm, Staples <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Fiddler: > > > > > > > > > "Morals are far too fluid...to be a guide in any dilemma; > > > > > > > > reason...provides the ability to make decisions." > > > > > > > > > Assuming you actually meant this, you implied that: > > > > > > > > > 1. Morals are not a constant. > > > > > > > > 2. Morals are not based on reason. > > > > > > > > > How could anyone live with a system of morality like that - one > > > > > > > > divorced from rationality and is "fluid", e.g., changes from > > > > > > > > day to > > > > > > > > day - on what basis? Irrationality? I suppose so.- Hide quoted > > > > > > > > text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
