Amazon.com Widgets
  • I believe morals are objective

    Morals are not black and white. Sense every person has a different back ground and different way of thinking, one cannot determine rather or not a persons actions are morally wrong unless you are that person. Killing is a tragedy, but if the person believes that it is right, such as in a case of a religious hallucination telling him to, or playing the vigilanti, the person believes that there is a just cause. If a person thinks that he is doing the right thing, then he is morally right. Rather or not he is guilty or should be jails is a completely different story

  • Is murder ever justifiable?

    I have to agree that some circumstances will set the justification of murder. Why? We are taught right from wrong at a very young age and we are taught that murder is something that is wrong. I do agree with that statement, BUT what if ... You were put into a situation that meant life or death for you? What if your life depended upon murdering the person who had kidnapped you and was raping you or physically abusing you? I think that certain circumstances can justify murder, but I also know that it is wrong. I also believe that even though someone may be forced to murder someone for their own safety , they would live for that forever. I can see both sides of the debate here. However, I do have agree that it is acceptable under certain circumstances. No one never really knows how they will react in certain situations when it is based on life or death.

  • Killing of another person can be morally justified.

    Think about it in the terms of Creator and Distroyer. If you look at religion, in most cases one who creates life is allowed to take it and no one else. Ok now if we look ate nature, what is mating but the creation of life. Life is created by life. By 2 of a closely related or 2 of the same animal in fact. That says to me, if you follow religions that follow the the ideals I mentioned first, I as a capable creator of human life (with help) should be able to take life as well.

  • Justifiying Death Crimes

    It is because murder is somewhat of a crime which is justified if there is an act. These acts can also make it a YES because people say that if there an investigation, people can also get their ideas. That makes it a real YES. So, I decided to agree.

  • Donald Fucking Trump.

    We cannot afford to be entirely egalitarian in this world; there are vile, repugnant human beings rising to power when they should be dead. Donald Trump, for instance, is a rapist - he raped his former wife. He's being allowed to run for Presidency in the United States of America. He is advocating for a fascist, genocidal regime that would devastate America's ethnically, culturally and religiously marginalized populations. If he gets his way millions of people will actually die because of what he plans to do - they will be sent back to impoverished states, war-torn states, states that ejected them due to ethnic, cultural and religious discrimination that will kill them if they re-enter. Millions of lives must be more important than one.

  • Set circumstances will

    State the justification of murder. Keeping oneself from further harm would qualify.
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Click . . . . . . . .

  • I believe it is

    Righterous kill is OK but only eye for an eye.If anyone with emphaty and information's sees this he will agree.Like LeTheodote said before me, I quote Imagine an honest, decent man going crazy after seeing his wife raped and murdered, and then hunting down and killing the perpetrators before law enforcement can do anything. Can you sit on that jury, look him in the eye, and convict him of murder? I'd buy him a drink, really. Moral questions of "can you EVER do X" aren't entirely interesting because you can always concoct some (crazy) situation to justify it",I could not punish him.What did he do wrong? As I said,anyone with empathy will agree.

  • Everything happens for a reason.

    I believe that the same applies for murder. In every murder there is a victim and a perpetrator. Both of them will always have some sort of background that has led them to a situation where the murder is possible, and whatever it is, the outcome is one of two things: either the murder happens or it doesn't. Either way, as far as both parties are concerned and as far as their moral values stretch, the murder would be justifiable in the eyes of someone, and anyone who isn't involved directly isn't in a moral position to judge that.

  • I believe that yes.

    Here is an educational link that has taught me all I know about this topic and supports my decision of yes, killing can be morally justified. As showing above on this lovely website, debate.Org, the world's people are in split minds about this topic (shown by the 1:1 ratio) and I strongly believe that this link shall change your mindsets and teeter the ratio in favour of Yes.

    Https://www.Youtube.Com/watch?V=nXPT8sw_FjU

  • If anybody Ever killed of of my family members...

    Let's just say the would be living to die another day. I wouldn't even need to think about it. It is the right thing to do. If they try and harm me and my family I'll return the favor. If they wouldn't want it done to them they shouldn't do it to another person. End of story.

  • Semantics - Compare the Definitions of Murder vs Killing

    I think the OP meant to say "Is killing ever morally justifiable", in which case I would say yes. However murder? Murder by definition is unlawful killing, and is thus deemed by society to be "wrongful" killing, i.e. "immoral" killing. It's a subtle semantics point, but rather relevant to the topic.

  • No killing allowed

    Even if you think it's the right thing to do...Ummm I t's NOT! I don't think people know what the're doing when they kill someone and think "I'm doing a good thing for the society!" thats right you're wrong,and why would you kill someone if you think the're doing something wrong.Unless the're a serial killer you are doing something WAY worse.

  • It is always immoral to kill another human being

    It can be justified in very few instances, such as: killing the leader of a genocidal movement, but it is still an immoral act. Being less of an immoral act than the the immoral act it ends still does not make it a moral act, or rather, not immoral.

    The moral thing to do is to utilize our critical thinking abilities to apply currently available, and develope new, techniques and technology necessary to resolve immoral acts morally.

  • It is always immoral to kill another human being

    It can be justified in very few instances, such as: killing the leader of a genocidal movement, but it is still an immoral act. Being less of an immoral act than the the immoral act it ends still does not make it a moral act, or rather, not immoral.

    The moral thing to do is to utilize our critical thinking abilities to apply currently available, and develope new, techniques and technology necessary to resolve immoral acts morally.

  • Murder or the taking of life is not morally acceptable

    It may be socially acceptable but it is not morally acceptable. The death penalty for example cannot be argued to be morally correct. Socially yes but not morally. It depends on your view of morals of course. Some feel they are man made and can be changed but considering most early religions and civilisations worked to a thou shalt not kill mantra or similar I would suggest the burden has weighed heavy on the human mind for time immemorial. I would argue killing/murder is very rarely squared internally and many wrestle with this moral dilemma regardless of circumstance. Ultimately I cannot see a position where it is morally acceptable to make that decision for someone else. People state it is acceptable morally to kill someone who has done X Y or Z but I do not understand this argument. That may be a cultural, social or emotional response but it cannot be construed as the moral one in my opinion.

  • Murder is objectively wrong

    Generally, killing another human person is morally acceptable in the name of justice ie an eye for an eye. Sometimes killing is done with the justification that it is pre-emotive, that is to say it is OK, with reasonable certainty, that the other will kill you if you don't act first, or, more obviously, to take the life of someone who has unjustifiably "murdered" another. So, murder is killing without justification while killing is simply with reasonable justification.
    With that differentiation, murder is always wrong because it is taking the life of an innocent human person. That is why abortion on demand is always immoral and wrong, because it always takes the life of an innocent human person.

  • By Definition, No

    Killing is defined as act of taking a life irrespective of the morality tied to the act.

    Murder is defined as the act of killing without valid justification.

    To conflate these two is to destroy meaningful moral categories, Equating the Charles Manson to a father who kills someone to save his child.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.
>