What separates war from murder?

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by richmondgator81, May 13, 2014.

  1. northandsouth
    Offline

    northandsouth Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2012
    Messages:
    230
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings Received:
    +69
    Seems to me he was very clear in stating the passage quoted offered a more eloquent version of his own personal beliefs and not what seems to bother you so.

    I am not a big fan of many things of the Catholic faith, but I have to say the statement offered is very compelling.

    There is a difference between "killing" and "murder." Contextual language of the 10 Commandments actually translate to "thou shalt not murder" and not "kill."

    Do you disagree with the passage offered simply because it is a tenent of the Catholic faith? Or do you have a more reasoned difference in believe and definition?

    In reading some of your subsequent responses you offered. And am confused with your reasoning.

    Causing the death of others for personal or wanton reasons can never be a good thing. Taking action that results in the loss of life of another human, to be moral, has to be in the advancement of a greater SOCIETAL good. As the Catholic quotation states, the "tranquility of order" sometimes can only be achieved through armed actions (both offensive and defensive in nature). Taking the life of an armed combatant in the field of war, taking the life of an intruder into your home, taking the life of someone randomly firing a weapon in a school, enacting capital punishment on a convicted person who took the life of another for personal reasons are all justified in the effort to achieve or preserve "tranquility of order."

    Can you please explain how the act of taking the life of an innocent unborn advances the concept of "tranquility of order?"
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  2. gatorev12
    Offline

    gatorev12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Messages:
    11,557
    Likes Received:
    266
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,332
    If everyone in the military is a murderer for fighting what you claim is an "unjust" war; then I can just as easily sit here and claim everyone who supports abortion is also a murderer for supporting an "unjust" medical procedure.

    So, again, you're a murderer too if that's the position you want to take.

    Don't tell me: you have a car and commute 35 miles roundtrip every day, AC unit that you run full-time in the summer, shower twice a day, and eat three meals a day. Since I'm willing to bet you're a global warming proponent, surely you must realize that such a massive carbon footprint and ecological consumption kills likely dozens of others indirectly too. Quite the body count you're starting to rack up...
    • Like Like x 2
  3. richmondgator81
    Offline

    richmondgator81 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +351
    Not everyone in the military has killed another person in an unjust war. Not every woman who is pro-choice has had an abortion. You're not making much sense here.
  4. gatorev12
    Offline

    gatorev12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Messages:
    11,557
    Likes Received:
    266
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,332
    The people who attacked us were based out of Afghanistan. Surely, you aren't sitting here saying that because a person was born somewhere, they can't voluntarily move to another country, right?

    So you're speaking in metaphors, not actual concrete examples. Gotcha. I have concrete examples of where "scored earth" and "burning down the neighborhood" tactics are used by AQ and other Islamist enemies, who don't tend to make much distinction in who or what they target (I'd wager they've killed more fellow Muslims in terrorist attacks than Westerners). Seems more than a little hypocritical of you to be throwing the word "murderer" around in reference to our troops without a single mention of what you consider those acts to be. Do you not care to attach the word "murderer" to an Islamist militant who sets off a car bomb in a crowded market in Pakistan, killing dozens of innocent people?
  5. richmondgator81
    Offline

    richmondgator81 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +351
    And as for environmentalism, you won't see me barking up that tree.

    Any environmentalist with gumption should just go ahead and kill themselves if they want to really help the planet.
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. richmondgator81
    Offline

    richmondgator81 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +351
    "Taking action that results in the loss of life of another human, to be moral, has to be in the advancement of a greater SOCIETAL good."

    According to who? Society?

    In that case, I'd argue that abortion promotes the advancement of a greater society - one not teeming with hundreds of thousands of unwanted children who grow up to become criminals and dead beats dependent on government handouts to survive.
  7. gatorev12
    Offline

    gatorev12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Messages:
    11,557
    Likes Received:
    266
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,332
    I'd wager very few people in the military have directly killed someone. But everyone has an indirect role. The infantryman needs air support, fire support from artillery and tanks, intelligence about where the enemy is, etc to do their jobs; and in order for there to be air support, there needs to be mechanics and technicians to keep the planes and helicopters flying; still others to keep the tanks and artillery pieces working; even more getting food, water, and ammunition to all of the above (logistics); and a number of people using a number of sources to gather intel. So you see, everyone has a role. That's how the military works.

    You're saying the military are murderers. A fairly blanket statement. Since the military operates as a group, the statement applies to the group. Unless you're trying to backtrack here and say that ONLY infantrymen and direct-fire MOSes are the *real* murderers (a distinction you did not make in your OP or in your subsequent posts).

    Likewise, not every pro-choice woman has had an abortion--and not every pro-choice supporter is a woman either. But everyone has their role. And, using your own blanket argument, that would mean everyone who directly or indirectly supports abortion whatsoever is a "murderer." I agree, it's not an argument I'm finding very convincing.
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. Minister_of_Information
    Offline

    Minister_of_Information I'm your huckleberry Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    13,741
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    In my prime
    Ratings Received:
    +970
    "We train young men to drop fire on people, but their commanders won't allow them to write 'f---' on their airplanes because it's obscene!" ~ Col. Kurz
  9. richmondgator81
    Offline

    richmondgator81 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +351
    "You're saying the military are murderers"

    No. I'm saying that I don't make a distinction between a man who signs up to join an unjust war and kills someone in that unjust war and a man who enters his neighbor's home and murders his neighbor's family.
  10. Minister_of_Information
    Offline

    Minister_of_Information I'm your huckleberry Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    13,741
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    In my prime
    Ratings Received:
    +970
    "Moral law is an invention of mankind for the disenfranchisement of the powerful in favor of the weak. Historical law subverts it at every turn. A moral view can never be proven right or wrong by any ultimate test. A man falling dead in a duel is not thought thereby to be proven in error as to his views. His very involvement in such a trial gives evidence of a new and broader view. The willingness of the principals to forgo further argument as the triviality which it in fact is and to petition directly the chambers of the historical absolute clearly indicates of how little moment are the opinions and of what great moment the divergences thereof. For the argument is indeed trivial, but not so the separate wills thereby made manifest. Man's vanity may well approach the infinite in capacity but his knowledge remains imperfect and howevermuch he comes to value his judgments ultimately he must submit them before a higher court. Here there can be no special pleading. Here are considerations of equity and rectitude and moral right rendered void and without warrant and here are the views of the litigants despised. Decisions of life and death, of what shall be and what shall not, beggar all question of right. In elections of these magnitudes are all lesser ones subsumed, moral, spiritual, natural." ~ Cormack McCarthy
  11. 92gator
    Offline

    92gator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    5,884
    Likes Received:
    296
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +804
    LOL!

    We're you trying to be funny?

    Abortion in this country has been legal since 1973.

    Has the number of "...unwanted children who grow up to become criminals and dead beats dependent on government handouts to survive" gone significantly down since then?

    If anything, seems like its skyrocketed--so even using your rationalization, legalized abortion has been a colossal FAIL.

    50 million innocent babies murdered, to avoid having a "...society....teeming with hundreds of thousands of unwanted children who grow up to become criminals and dead beats dependent on government handouts to survive", only to get exactly that--or rather, a society with MILLIONS of criminals and deadbeats dependent on government handouts.

    ....and you're equating WAR with murder???
  12. Dreamliner
    Offline

    Dreamliner Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    64,042
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +821
    Yep ...

    (1) abortion

    (2) war

    Like that
  13. gatorev12
    Offline

    gatorev12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Messages:
    11,557
    Likes Received:
    266
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,332
    And I'm saying I don't make the distinction between the man who supports abortion and the man who walks into a stranger's home and murders a three month old baby.

    That's the import of your argument.
  14. Dreamliner
    Offline

    Dreamliner Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    64,042
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +821
    A nation that will not protect its most helpless members damn sure doesn't care about killing people overseas.
  15. richmondgator81
    Offline

    richmondgator81 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +351
    "Has the number of "...unwanted children who grow up to become criminals and dead beats dependent on government handouts to survive" gone significantly down since then?"

    What a silly comment. The number of children born period has increased drastically since 1973.

    3.1 million in 1973
    4.1 million in 2009

    Why don't you tell me how many abortions have been performed since 1973? I bet you have that number handy. That will give us an idea of how many more unwanted children we would have on our hands today if they hadn't been aborted.

    Moreover, what does legality have to do with anything? Are you suggesting abortion wasn't a common practice before 1973? lol
  16. Dreamliner
    Offline

    Dreamliner Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    64,042
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +821
    I was with you until this. Your HUGE blindspot with regards to abortion makes your outrage on war ring hollow.
  17. MichiGator2002
    Online

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    15,700
    Likes Received:
    412
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,774
    That really isn't drastic at all when you consider it as a function of population growth. As for how many future criminals, etc, were "prevented", that is all just some of the finest rationalization in the banality-of-evil tradition that has ever been the banner of progressivism.
  18. richmondgator81
    Offline

    richmondgator81 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +351
    I was playing devil's advocate really. Whether you abhor or tolerate abortion, I can recognize the benefit of not having 5 million more unwanted children in this country. Just as I'm sure war has it's societal upsides ($$$$$).
  19. richmondgator81
    Offline

    richmondgator81 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +351
    In other words, I don't see societal benefits as a justification for murder.
  20. MichiGator2002
    Online

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    15,700
    Likes Received:
    412
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,774
    The problem is your 5 million so-called unwanted are less than a tenth of the actual number or abortions, the rest of which statistically would be growing our economy, being an increased consumer and taxpayer base, etc. But I am sure that our pyramid model entitlements are never going to miss them!

Share This Page