[Mr. Bob]

Ever since our inception, man has killed. Although an action with permanent repercussions, whether it is moral or otherwise is debatable. Does every man have his limit? If so, what�s yours. When would it be acceptable to kill?

If you believe in more then one answer, please select the one that is the most important, and explain why. On the other hand, if your selection is not on the list, please post for all to see.

Vote above�

[AKcrab]

Kill for values and ideology? I'm very sad that there are already votes in that category. I guess some folks feel religious wars are actually justified.

[Zimphire]

Too bad you can't vote for more than one.

[fireside]

i believe that killing another person is wrong at all times. there is no justification in taking the life of another person.

[voodoo]

I second that.

I put my trust in God, when I leave this world and in this world.

[Mitser]

In my opinion, I DO NOT think killing another human being is right. However, if someone attempts to hurt me or mine I will do everything in my power to stop him or her. Although, I would avoid killing at all cost. I would much rather say shoot a limb or inflict just enough damage to other to give me or my significant person out of harms way. I did vote for the one if someone is trying to harm me.

Matthew

[Macfreak7]

Originally posted by AKcrab:
Kill for values and ideology? I'm very sad that there are already votes in that category. I guess some folks feel religious wars are actually justified.

Use your imagination a little more. If someone would've killed Hitler in the 20's, it would've been for the greater good. In that sense killing for values/ideologies is okay.

[fireside]

Originally posted by Macfreak7:
Use your imagination a little more. If someone would've killed Hitler in the 20's, it would've been for the greater good. In that sense killing for values/ideologies is okay.

of course, hindsight is 20/20. no one really knew what Hitler was going to do in the 20s.

but killing someone for values/ideologies is a double-edged sword. Hitler killed the Jews in his own ideologies mind you.

but its not really like a double-edged sword, because when most people are killed through ideologies its from an evil purpose. the ratio of good to evil in this instance is rather low. but who are we to say whats good or evil? to Hitler (and the Klu Klux Klan, al-Queda, etc) they believe what they are/were doing was for the greater good.


but i bring up a better poll: if you could cure all cancer by killing one innocent person, would you?

i only would if the person who was going to be killed volunteered out of his/her own free will. and if no one volunteered, i'd sacrifice my own life to cure cancer.

[Jaey]

Originally posted by Macfreak7:
Use your imagination a little more. If someone would've killed Hitler in the 20's, it would've been for the greater good. In that sense killing for values/ideologies is okay.

But then we may not have developed nuclear weapons, and thus no nuclear power, thus no Chernobyl, no Three Mile Island, and...
I thought I had a point.

[starman]

Why don't you watch the beheading video and ask that question again, Brainiac?