Lately I have been confronted with the question of killing in order to survive. This is the most fundamental moral dilemma at the core of all of our lives. Logic has a say in this since we are required to understand for ourselves what we must do when a situation of this kind presents itself. The individual dilemma for all of us is, do we kill, to not be killed? The short answer is yes. We have an instinct to survive. All of us. When confronted with imminent death we will fight back to not die. It is natural and right to do so. But what of other circumstances that are not directly related to our own life? Such as the conflict in Libya? Our country and other countries, through the United Nations, have concluded that surgical strikes against a tyrannical regime is appropriate and necessary to prevent wholesale slaughter of it's citizens by it's leader. Is this the right thing to do? Here the question of yes or no is a little bit more complicated. An assessment has been made that yes it is the appropriate thing to do. The exchange of doing this or more, instead of doing nothing is based upon a cost/benefit analysis. If we allow the tyrant to murder his citizens while we stand by doing nothing we would be invalidating ourselves as a freedom loving society. It also would embolden others to take similar paths to dissent suppression since they would see no obstacle to them doing so. The greatest reason for me though is trying to stop any more needless deaths right now. The right to life by those living should never be allowed to occur without consent or recognized obligation by those who would sacrifice their lives. We must stand upon principles that honor life and crush those actions that would violate that very same honor. We are not yet into an enlightened age where all of this has been settled so in the meantime to create a better future for our children we must make the necessary sacrifices to stop the means that would violate even one persons right to life.
No comments:
Post a Comment