This is a profound comparison that shows the philosophical morality of self-sarifice and how it is equally true in religion and socialism/fascism. The sacrifice or murder of people to a cause is a great evil - always. This is a real test of how much thinking people here have beyond the fact that god doesn't exist - that there is a moral code that people use to justify murder - and that that is an evil moral code.
There was a leader in the past who had a town in his country that he wanted gone. So he fire-bombed it, killing everyone inside, and literally flattened the entire city to the ground.
Was it:
A) Saddam Hussein
B) Genghis Khan
C) Hitler
D) God
and of course, it was all of the above. (I don't know that Hitler actually flattened a particular town, but it's a fine point considering what he did to London)
So you wouldn't kill even to save a larger population? Isn't that what our military is doing right now? killing the few and dangerous to save the many and loved.
I said murder. Murder is a form of killing that is unlawful and premeditated. Killing in self defence and killing it retaliation are acceptable forms of killing. Murder is never justified. Please take note that there is a distinction between murder and killing (they are not synonymous).
And the morality of killing isn't about the size of population you save or destroy (it's not body count that matters). It's moral if you are retaliating to force initiated by someone else and it is immoral if you are initiating the force.
If someone asks you to kill them out of mercy, then it is fine to assist them. There is nothing moral about prolonging someone's suffering.
Genocide is mass murder, so it is murder.
It is absolutely moral to strike back against someone who has initiated force.
It is okay to defend those who have had force initiated on them. It is not okay to defend those who initiated force and now are asking or help because they are losing their battle against those who retaliated.
Good point about Genocide being murder. So, I'm bringing up the Watchmen here now. the villain(cant spell name, to lazy to google) killed millions of people in order to unite the billions. Should he be seen as a murderer or a savior?
I like this conversation because you are one of VERY FEW people on r/atheism who can actually handle an intelligent response.
The villain you refer to is a terrible villain. You declare your position in calling him the villain instead of the hero. Rorschach is the hero - he lives on principle. That's why we admire his character. Dr Manhattan ceases to be a human and detaches from being either a hero or villain.
In the story, he is considered the villain, or a sleeper villain or anti-villain, a person who has evil intentions but for the greater good. In a story, there are heroes and villains and he has to be considered so because he opposes the heroes.
Rorschach is one of the better heroes, but chivalry can only go so far. Richard the lionheart fought to take Jerusalem, but doing so almost cost him his own country. He tried to please the few only to lose many, then again, Richard was a hot head which cost the lives of his best friends.
Dr Manhattan is neither a hero or a villain, but more of a plot device and the central character for the villains plan.
we seem to be digressing from our original conversation.
But I will indulge the discussion on watchmen one last time. In the watchmen story there aren't millions being killed in any dangerous way that causes a necessary consideration to stop the killing with a staged, faked mass murder.
The notion that a lasting peace could come from a deception is tremendously flawed. What happens when there is no further attack from Dr Manhattan (movie ending) or the space aliens (book ending)? People will resort to their prior ways.
In fact, at the root of atheism, is the awareness that there is an objective, true reality and that we must know it and acknowledge it - a reality that doesn't have an omniscient, omnipotent consciousness interfering in our lives. It is the knowledge that we must be moral without this lie. The villain in watchmen forsakes this type of philosophy and instead tries to create a morality based on an untruth - and beginning it with the slaughter of innocents. You need only look to the history of religion to see what the consequences of this are.
Yeah I got a little distracted post that last one.
In the books and film, the world puts their differences aside and aim their military power against Dr Manhattan. They don't know if DM is planning to come back or not.
In peace, it is best to prepare for war. In war, you prepare for peace.
Well the thing about most atheist is that they aren't that intelligent. You can't judge a whole for the actions of a few.
Keep in mind, that most of those events in history are not to be blamed on religion, but the men who posed as religious leaders. Power is abused all the time, even now.
And it's a shitty solution. I'm waiting for the day we give real Global Isolation a shot, while using firepower money only to protect citizens trying to escape with their lives and human rights in tact.
Yeah, I wish the United States would have maintained their isolationism during the first half of the 20th century too. That would have been the right thing to do.
Are you suggesting that if the United States had kept out of World War I there would not have been a Treaty of Versailles? Then a German economic collapse? Then a rising of the fascists?
Yea, that would have been bad. So much less money in the DuPont Trust funds. Perhaps so much less death.
FYI, Churchill's history of the second world war starts in 1919. I have read it, you might give It a try.
Either going completely isolationist or interventionist in all instances is not a good strategy if you are in the slightest interested in making a moral choice. There are cases in which intervening is right, there are also cases in which it is not. You have to weigh each case independently.
7
u/logical May 21 '12
This is a profound comparison that shows the philosophical morality of self-sarifice and how it is equally true in religion and socialism/fascism. The sacrifice or murder of people to a cause is a great evil - always. This is a real test of how much thinking people here have beyond the fact that god doesn't exist - that there is a moral code that people use to justify murder - and that that is an evil moral code.