Human rights of terrorists in poor countries

  • Thread starter Thread starter One_point
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
O

One_point

Guest
Is it moral for me as a catholic to believe that necessity can force governments of poor dysfunctional nations to engage in extrajudicial killings, or assassination, of terrorists? Even against the written law of the land?

I expressed such a view in a discussion and I now feel mighty disturbed by it, like I did something wrong. I feel guilty. I just think that terrorists are not proper civilians but bad combatants who dont care for the rules of war, so they should not receive civilian protection. Since it’s legal to shoot a combatant in a conflict, even if he is unarmed, if it will bring military advantage, then I wondered why can not the same apply to terrorists who are waging a war on states? But if they are citizens and in the country, then it’s hard if not impossible to justify necessity in shooting them, and yet I did express such an opinion, that shooting them was justified because they were not civilians (a real case of a terrorist named by the UN and US happened of an Islamist imam who preaches hatred and said on TV that non Muslims in the country ought to be killed and celebrated the murder of over 60 people at a Centre last year. He was killed a few days after an Islamist sprayed bullets in a church on Sunday and killed 6 and wonded many, and a bomb exploded later) There have been many such attacks and they increase with frequency. For some reason, that man kept getting off the hook in court, perhaps he was bribing the judges. The country has many corruption problems. The police have done such things in the past with local gangs that terrorized the populace, ended up killing them and that was how they were stopped. So many people are tense and there is fear that Christians will retaliate and then an interreligious war may be sparked. That is the aim of the terrorists, they have been trying to spark a religious war.

In the discussion, I said that given our institutional dysfunctions and problems with corruption, that it was justified for the police to do something to these people who are recruiting murderers and giving them weapons, if that is the only way to stop it, before we can become a proper functional democracy with good institutions.

Is this a sin to express such a cold-hearted view… it seems so merciless now that I think of it, but what about the human rights of the victims of terrorists? Did I sin? I feel so dirty now. :(😦
 
One_point said:
Is it moral for me as a catholic to believe that necessity can force governments of poor dysfunctional nations to engage in extrajudicial killings, or assassination, of terrorists? Even against the written law of the land?
Click to expand...
2268 The fifth commandment forbids direct and intentional killing as gravely sinful. The murderer and those who cooperate voluntarily in murder commit a sin that cries out to heaven for vengeance.
 
Thank you. I understand that as an individual I cannot kill, but does it apply to authorities charged with protecting a population? Can it not be self defense? What about the killing of Osama bin laden? Is it immoral for a president to order it? Of is it moral for a catholic to believe it moral for a president to order it?
 
I don’t see a moral problem with the kind of action you are speaking of. If somebody decides to partake in terrorism or purposefully kill innocents, I don’t see how it could be morally problematic to neutralize such a threat.
 
DannyGR said:
I don’t see a moral problem with the kind of action you are speaking of. If somebody decides to partake in terrorism or purposefully kill innocents, I don’t see how it could be morally problematic to neutralize such a threat.
Click to expand...
Not only can you defend your life but you also have a duty to protect the lives for which you are responsible. If you refuse to protect you family, allowing them to be killed without making any effort to defend them, then you will be breaking the Fifth Commandment.
 
One_point said:
Is it moral for me as a catholic to believe that necessity can force governments of poor dysfunctional nations to engage in extrajudicial killings, or assassination, of terrorists? Even against the written law of the land?

I expressed such a view in a discussion and I now feel mighty disturbed by it, like I did something wrong. I feel guilty. I just think that terrorists are not proper civilians but bad combatants who dont care for the rules of war, so they should not receive civilian protection. Since it’s legal to shoot a combatant in a conflict, even if he is unarmed, if it will bring military advantage, then I wondered why can not the same apply to terrorists who are waging a war on states? But if they are citizens and in the country, then it’s hard if not impossible to justify necessity in shooting them, and yet I did express such an opinion, that shooting them was justified because they were not civilians (a real case of a terrorist named by the UN and US happened of an Islamist imam who preaches hatred and said on TV that non Muslims in the country ought to be killed and celebrated the murder of over 60 people at a Centre last year. He was killed a few days after an Islamist sprayed bullets in a church on Sunday and killed 6 and wonded many, and a bomb exploded later) There have been many such attacks and they increase with frequency. For some reason, that man kept getting off the hook in court, perhaps he was bribing the judges. The country has many corruption problems. The police have done such things in the past with local gangs that terrorized the populace, ended up killing them and that was how they were stopped. So many people are tense and there is fear that Christians will retaliate and then an interreligious war may be sparked. That is the aim of the terrorists, they have been trying to spark a religious war.

In the discussion, I said that given our institutional dysfunctions and problems with corruption, that it was justified for the police to do something to these people who are recruiting murderers and giving them weapons, if that is the only way to stop it, before we can become a proper functional democracy with good institutions.

Is this a sin to express such a cold-hearted view… it seems so merciless now that I think of it, but what about the human rights of the victims of terrorists? Did I sin? I feel so dirty now. :(😦
Click to expand...
terrorism is an act of war and as an act of war, they expose themselves to the consequences of engaging in war which is being killed themselves. It has nothing to do with whether to country is corrupt, ruled effectively or with consistency. If someone is willing to kill other, they should be ready for the results which is to be killed themselves. It’s the old adage, you reap what you sow. Terrorism is especially bad because people that engage in it are targeting defenseless civilians not usually other combatants as in war. Any country no matter how good or bad the government is has a right to defend itself and a duty to defend it’s citizens even if it isn’t done all the time or consistently. Those that are teaching and recruiting others into this are equally just as bad. I’m not sure what your question is but view terrorism as an act of war by cowards on defenseless civilians and stop worrying about their civil rights.
 
One_point said:
Is it moral for me as a catholic to believe that necessity can force governments of poor dysfunctional nations to engage in extrajudicial killings, or assassination, of terrorists? Even against the written law of the land?

I expressed such a view in a discussion and I now feel mighty disturbed by it, like I did something wrong. I feel guilty. I just think that terrorists are not proper civilians but bad combatants who dont care for the rules of war, so they should not receive civilian protection. Since it’s legal to shoot a combatant in a conflict, even if he is unarmed, if it will bring military advantage, then I wondered why can not the same apply to terrorists who are waging a war on states? But if they are citizens and in the country, then it’s hard if not impossible to justify necessity in shooting them, and yet I did express such an opinion, that shooting them was justified because they were not civilians (a real case of a terrorist named by the UN and US happened of an Islamist imam who preaches hatred and said on TV that non Muslims in the country ought to be killed and celebrated the murder of over 60 people at a Centre last year. He was killed a few days after an Islamist sprayed bullets in a church on Sunday and killed 6 and wonded many, and a bomb exploded later) There have been many such attacks and they increase with frequency. For some reason, that man kept getting off the hook in court, perhaps he was bribing the judges. The country has many corruption problems. The police have done such things in the past with local gangs that terrorized the populace, ended up killing them and that was how they were stopped. So many people are tense and there is fear that Christians will retaliate and then an interreligious war may be sparked. That is the aim of the terrorists, they have been trying to spark a religious war.

In the discussion, I said that given our institutional dysfunctions and problems with corruption, that it was justified for the police to do something to these people who are recruiting murderers and giving them weapons, if that is the only way to stop it, before we can become a proper functional democracy with good institutions.

Is this a sin to express such a cold-hearted view… it seems so merciless now that I think of it, but what about the human rights of the victims of terrorists? Did I sin? I feel so dirty now. :(😦
Click to expand...
Are you after what is legal or what is moral?
 
Killing poor terrorists may save lives they may kill later.😃
 
One_point said:
Thank you. I understand that as an individual I cannot kill, but does it apply to authorities charged with protecting a population? Can it not be self defense? What about the killing of Osama bin laden? Is it immoral for a president to order it? Of is it moral for a catholic to believe it moral for a president to order it?
Click to expand...
If it’s to save lives of the innocent, the answer is defiantly, ‘yes.’ the killing of terrorists is in keeping with the CCC (sorry, but I do not know where it is. But it states something like, for self-defense and protection of innocent citizens, killing is permitted. It must be emphasized, however, that non-lethal force must be used if reasonably possible.

LOVE! ❤️

I found something related to just killings, courtesy of Holly3278:

2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.”
 
The_Serpent said:
Did people cheer when Bin Laden was killed? :knight2:

Yes! 😃
Click to expand...
I prayed for his soul. I would hope most other people of faith did the same. Causing the death of another human no matter how justified is not cause for celebration.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top