Show of HandsShow of Hands

Cole12 October 22nd, 2014 3:39pm

Inspired by SFLiberal and Skarface69: In most societies, is murder banned predominately for moral reasons?

20 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

FacePalm That Trick Never Works
10/22/14 7:05 pm

No, it's banned because most people don't want to be murdered.

Reply
kermie gaytopia
10/23/14 6:58 am

I'd say it's because you can't have a functioning society. Laws don't care what people "want"--just what's good for society as a whole.

Nemacyst No Lives Matter
10/22/14 11:08 am

This user is currently being ignored

Reply
jvc1133 61535
10/22/14 10:35 am

I seem to remember it was one of the items on Moses tablets.

Reply
kscott516 Masks fail
10/22/14 10:39 am

Those that have the gold make the rules?

typetype level 2 pretty
10/23/14 6:35 am

He who dies with the most gold wins.

DoCiDuLi
10/22/14 9:32 am

It seems like a moral issue to be because I was taught it from the time I can remember.

Liberty 4,032,064
10/22/14 9:17 am

No, it's about individual rights and practicality.

Reply
bluerum29 optimistic idealist
10/22/14 9:51 am

Practical I wold consider killing some people, morality keeps me from ever doing it.

Liberty 4,032,064
10/22/14 10:19 am

Practicality in the sense of keeping taxpayers alive for the government.

Liberty 4,032,064
10/22/14 10:20 am

Think if you were a farmer and someone kept killing your cows.

bluerum29 optimistic idealist
10/22/14 10:25 am

I'm thinking more practical reasons for me personally

Liberty 4,032,064
10/22/14 10:27 am

You're not the one that banned murder, though.

dfish at home
10/22/14 6:26 pm

I'd say on a personal level the reason for not murdering is a moral one. But on a govt/societal lvl the reason for outlawing it is on principle/practicality. A functioning/civil society needs a sense that privateproperty and life need to be protected

Cole12 ...
10/22/14 8:42 am

To me, banning murder has to do with practicality, not morality. If we want to live in a civilized society - and who doesn't? - then it's extremely impractical to allow people to go around and kill others for no reason.

Reply
MrMilkdud
10/22/14 8:56 am

Why can't morality be practical?

kscott516 Masks fail
10/22/14 9:07 am

Impractical by what standard? Less people, less resources required.

Cole12 ...
10/22/14 9:09 am

MrM: It can be. Problem is, nobody has ever objectively proven that murder is immoral.

MrMilkdud
10/22/14 9:09 am

He did say "for no reason."
Utilitarians and pragmatists would have no defensible objection to organized culling of the "useless eaters."

MrMilkdud
10/22/14 9:10 am

You may want to look into natural law theory, Cole. You may also want to specifically define what burden of proof would be sufficient.

Cole12 ...
10/22/14 9:11 am

kscott: If murder were legal, the economy would probably collapse and society would crumble. There'd be more resources per person, but that means little if people are afraid to leave their homes.

kscott516 Masks fail
10/22/14 9:12 am

To take what they have or to eliminate competition is a reason. People only kill for reasons. Even if that reason is "just for fun".

Cole12 ...
10/22/14 9:14 am

By "for no reason," I meant "in cold blood." I guess I should have worded it differently.

bluerum29 optimistic idealist
10/22/14 9:15 am

Just because murder were legal doesn't mean everyone would be looking to do it.

Cole12 ...
10/22/14 9:17 am

MrM: To prove that murder is immoral, you would need to prove that murder has an inherent punishment and/or that human life matters.

MrMilkdud
10/22/14 9:19 am

Yes. But it would be much more commonplace.

Things like this have to be legislated to account for society's lowest common denominator. And there are people who don't murder people simply because it's illegal.

kscott516 Masks fail
10/22/14 9:19 am

Exactly, blue. If I kill someone then there's a real good chance a family member or close friend would want to exact revenge. I wouldn't want to live watching my back every second. It wouldn't just became major chaos.

MrMilkdud
10/22/14 9:20 am

Neither of those conditions are sufficient for everyone, cole.

political Georgia
10/22/14 9:25 am

Murder is a create tool for population control, right?

MrMilkdud
10/22/14 9:27 am

I can provide moral "proofs" for just about any moral claim, and I can tear down those same proofs just as easily because they all rest on premises we would have to mutually agree on. And those premises rest on premises. Infinite regression.

MrMilkdud
10/22/14 9:28 am

And then you have people who reject the whole notion of morality to begin with, and claim that it is itself just a social construct.

MrMilkdud
10/22/14 9:30 am

Your question has some assumed premises, though. That we want to live in a civilized society for example. Or what a civilized society is. Or that murder exists, and that it is somehow different from killing.

MrMilkdud
10/22/14 9:40 am

So on what basis do you accept premises like murder, civilization, or that civilization is a "good," and how do you prove that those things are true?