Posted by Eugene Volokh:
Religious Denominations That Forbid (or Frown on) Deadly Self-Defense, But
Allow Non-Deadly Self-Defense:
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_03_08-2009_03_14.shtml#1236812287
I'm looking for good sources that discuss whether there are religious
groups that
1. take the view that deadly force is always bad, even in
self-defense or defense of others, but nondeadly force (including
pepper spray, stun guns, and other devices that are extremely
unlikely to kill) is permissible, or
2. take the view that given the choice between nondeadly force and
deadly force, one should always use nondeadly force, unless the
nondeadly force is very likely to fail (e.g., all one has for
nondeadly force is fists vs. an attacker's knife).
I would think that many denominations do take one or the other view,
for instance because they take "thou shalt not kill" (as opposed to
"thou shalt not murder") quite seriously, but don't go for a
thoroughgoing "turn the other cheek" renunciation of all violence. But
I'd like to see more concrete statements, if possible, from groups
that indeed take such a view.
I realize that stun guns and pepper spray may not have gotten a great
deal of specific attention from theologians, but I would think that
there would have been something written on this broad subject of just
what kinds of violence are appropriate even to those who frown on
deadly self-defense. If any of you have some pointers, I'd love to see
them. Thanks!
_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.powerblogs.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh
