To Kill or Not – Tough question – Harder decision

[Goober]

I think that's a very loaded question. Do you mean if a person is a soldier killing to protect others; you see two people fighting and one has a knife, do you kill the one with the knife to save the other? What if you're wrong and the one with the knife managed to be the one to get control of a weapon that was going to be used on them? Too many variables.


The Military were set aside with specific Poll questions.

 

[Goober]

Plse read response above in blue.

This is a thread topic that goes to the core of a persons beliefs - No answer is right and no answer is wrong. It is that persons deeply held belief that they would or would not take a life. You have to respect as much as what a person would do to protect themselves, family others as those that would not take a life.

A topic that where a reply can be taken out of context - If you belive that it was, then clarify what was stated.
So we keep it civil. Liking or disliking the reply / question is not being ignorant - It is simply disagreement. So again we keep it civil

 

[JLM]

To Kill or Not – Tough question – Harder decision

To Kill or Not – a question that many have a so called firm position depending upon a number of possible situations. Yet the vast majority have never had to make that decision. That is a good thing as it reflects our society as basically safe

It's probably better if a person waits for the situation to present itself before deciding what you going to do. Nothing like going off "half cocked" in a touchy situation.

 

[Goober]

It's probably better if a person waits for the situation to present itself before deciding what you going to do. Nothing like going off "half cocked" in a touchy situation.

Yeah like loading a gun - Pointy end goes in first.

 

[VanIsle]

No VI - It was not intended that way - I was just stating again that we have to keep this civil - If i found you post to be offensive - 1 - i would report it - 2 I would tell you why - 3 If it needed some clarification i would ask you for that.

You may not have read all posts so i was - 1 - bringing this to your attention - Not saying or implying you have been rude or offensive - most importantly to remind us all to keep it civil.

Hope that explains my reply.

Yes it does and thank you.:smile:

 

[JLM]

As long as you are not specifying which cow/pig how can you be held responsible, you're are simply eating off the same cow/pig a lot of other people are so it's not your fault that it had to die and besides you wouldn't want to waste meat that is there for the taking.

 

[Cliffy]

I just have one question to ask you then Gerry. While you may not be the one to use the weapon to kill another person, if you stand by and do nothing, are you any less responsible?


So you are saying that someone who dies as a result of major stress is weak?
I noticed your use of the word all and that was why I asked the question
If their life is so sacred, why would you kill them.

VanIsle, there is nothing that lives on this planet that does not do so without some other life form dying. From the tiniest microbial form to the blue whale, everything has to eat something else to survive. In the aboriginal cosmology, all life is sacred, from the smallest to the largest, but as humans, we need to kill to survive and to feed our families. Everything was created by the Creator so it is sacred. This view allows a person to kill with respect for the creature that gives its life to feed us. That includes all vegetable life too, even for medicinal purposes. By treating life as sacred, the people were in a constant state of gratitude for what was available to them.

Do you see much of that going on in our culture? Do you think that animals raised in feed lots are being treated with respect or are treated humanely? Our culture says that only humans are sacred. I find that lacking in so many ways but particularly in the spiritual way.

 

[Omicron]

Inuit guys tended to have more than one wife because if they killed an opponent, they had to take on his wife.

To Kill or Not – Tough question – Harder decision

To Kill or Not – a question that many have a so called firm position depending upon a number of possible situations. Yet the vast majority have never had to make that decision. That is a good thing as it reflects our society as basically safe.

How do antibodies settle that question?

You do know that for the first four billion years of this planet's life it was one cell against another until, hmm, some magical thing happened involving sexual genetic recombination combined with a relatively independant immune system.

 

[VanIsle]

VanIsle, there is nothing that lives on this planet that does not do so without some other life form dying. From the tiniest microbial form to the blue whale, everything has to eat something else to survive. In the aboriginal cosmology, all life is sacred, from the smallest to the largest, but as humans, we need to kill to survive and to feed our families. Everything was created by the Creator so it is sacred. This view allows a person to kill with respect for the creature that gives its life to feed us. That includes all vegetable life too, even for medicinal purposes. By treating life as sacred, the people were in a constant state of gratitude for what was available to them.

Do you see much of that going on in our culture? Do you think that animals raised in feed lots are being treated with respect or are treated humanely? Our culture says that only humans are sacred. I find that lacking in so many ways but particularly in the spiritual way.

I don't disagree with you at all Cliff. I would never say that a cow/pig/chicken/deer/moose etc. is sacred to me. Important to me - yes but sacred - no. I would never eat or kill anything that I consider sacred. I don't believe that because God created something it becomes sacred. He is sacred to me (you refer to Him as The Creator but to me He is God). We do kill to survive and sadly, sometimes that may mean the taking of a human life. I guess we don't need to kill to survive. I have a nephew that truly believes nothing needs to die so that he can live. He won't even wear a pair of leather shoes. Yes - he can afford them. He's a psychiatrist. He won't even eat fish. He will eat things like butter, cheese and eggs. Anything that an animal can produce while alive and that he considers edible. He won't eat any part of the dead animal. His restrictions to the best of my knowledge are only in the area of not killing an animal for food.

 

[Goober]

I don't disagree with you at all Cliff. I would never say that a cow/pig/chicken/deer/moose etc. is sacred to me. Important to me - yes but sacred - no. I would never eat or kill anything that I consider sacred. I don't believe that because God created something it becomes sacred.


God created all and was clear - while we have mastery over these we are not to kill, harvest to extinction for one point.