You Shall NOT Kill!

[donsnow]

Why is there war?
Because people think they know better than, “You shall not kill.”

Why are there murders?
Because some people think they know better than, “You shall not kill.”

Why do some kill in self-defense as first response?
Fear probably, underlayed by the attitude of knowing better than “You shall not.”

I wish people would remember, all the trouble Lucifer, the Devil, that old Satan, has caused and still causes, because he thinks he knows better than God. We aren’t supposed to be like him, we’re supposed to be like Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ didn’t and doesn’t thing he knows better than his Heavenly Father. He submitted to his Father’s will, to accept his mission to earth. He submitted to John the Baptist, when he was baptized. He submitted to his mother at the party, when he made wine from water. He submitted to the Sanhedrin, when they came and took him. He submitted to Pontius Pilate, when he was scourged. He submitted to the Roman soldiers, when they put a crown of thorns on his head and mocked him. He submitted to the crucifixion and died for it. He submitted to the Holy Spirit, when raised from the dead.
He didn’t know better and saved us all, not knowing better than God.

 

[Ender]

Why is there war?
Because people think they know better than, “You shall not kill.”

The Church teaches that not all wars are immoral and that defense can be not only a right but a duty.

Why are there murders?
Because some people think they know better than, “You shall not kill.”

Murder is intrinsically evil, killing in war, self defense, or capital punishment are not.

Why do some kill in self-defense as first response?
Fear probably, underlayed by the attitude of knowing better than “You shall not.”

You distort this one: if it is the only way to stop an aggressor we may kill in self defense. No one argues that defending yourself or others gives you free reign to kill.

Ender

 

[sidbrown]

You distort this one: if it is the only way to stop an aggressor we may kill in self defense.

If the only way to stop an aggressor is to drop two Atomic Bombs on two different cities, killing innocent children and other civilians, then is this right?

 

[CWBetts]

If the only way to stop an aggressor is to drop two Atomic Bombs on two different cities, killing innocent children and other civilians, then is this right?

One would be hard-pressed to defend either the a-bombs or Dresden as “self defense.” Although I feel WWII to be a just war for the allies, this does not mean mistakes were not made. I even feel bad calling them mistakes. What they were were atrocities. But as I said, overall, the United States was justified in fighting both Japan and Germany

 

[donsnow]

The Church teaches that not all wars are immoral and that defense can be not only a right but a duty.
Murder is intrinsically evil, killing in war, self defense, or capital punishment are not.
You distort this one: if it is the only way to stop an aggressor we may kill in self defense. No one argues that defending yourself or others gives you free reign to kill.

Ender

I didn’t say wars were immoral…only one side need start a war, because that side thinks it knows better than “You shall not kill.” Then, the other side is justified in a defensive war.

I think that capital punishment could be called a necessary evil, because I think it’s wrong.

Notice, I said, “As a first response”, in self defense, meaning no deliberation was given to any need to kill. Remember, I’ve been in different self defense situations; in one I was afraid for my life because one of three people was attacking me and in the other I just chased the one armed assailant out of my taxi, after disarming him.