It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by TheIrishJihad83
Morality often comes down to your beliefs. Christians are more likely to take the stance that all life is precious especially human life because God created it.
Atheists are more likely to see life as nothing special, just a naturally occurring phenomenon that is quite common and just another result of biological processes.
Personally I think it is wrong to take life for no reason. And I am not a religious person at all.
All life came from stars and will return there once more.
Originally posted by BulletShogun
Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by Blaine91555
Morality is an individual concept.. for some killing is not morally wrong.
I find killing animals, even hunting, morally wrong.
Society does not have an ethical dilemma with it.
Can't really dictate morals.edit on 1/30/2012 by Rockpuck because: (no reason given)
What if an animal population gets out of hand? like lets say if deer populate so much that on a weekly basis there are car accidents because of it
Originally posted by Blaine91555
Is it morally wrong to take a life? Not really, say bioethicists
www.bioedge.org
(visit the link for the full news article)
Is it morally wrong to kill people? Not really, argue two eminent American bioethicists in an early online article in the Journal of Medical Ethics....
...“[I]f killing were wrong just because it is causing death or the loss of life, then the same principle would apply with the same strength to pulling weeds out of a garden. If it is not immoral to weed a garden, then life as such cannot really be sacred, and killing as such cannot be morally wrong.”
Originally posted by essanance
I believe alot of the super Elite Groups at the top were formed to push the mindset that Human evolution must be controlled from the top and they are taught to see themselves as above the rest of humanity , because they believe its for the greater good ..They see themselves as the guardians of human existence ,there for if they have to kill a few billion of us for the "GREATER GOOD" then they think so be it . It is sad that we believe we have freedom when common sense clearly would show that we do not , we are walking piles of flesh and organs to be used as needed for there "GREATER GOOD" . It terrifies me to imagine what they have planed for us . The people of United States are the most Diverse group of people anywhere and if your goal is to fine the best most adapted Human Genes then this is where they would look .Now take all that and realise they have built huge internment camps everywhere in this country and have created systems to know every detail about the population and you start to get some truthfully scary pictures in your head ...
Most of us, make a BIG distinction between sentient life, animal life, and plant life.
You could flip the question, is it moral to maintain a dying person on life support while letting a person who can be saved, die as a result?
Bioethicists break life down into numbers, who can get the most life as a result of this decision....
Is it morally wrong to kill people? Not really, argue two eminent American bioethicists in an early online article in the Journal of Medical Ethics. Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, of Duke University, and Franklin G. Miller, of the National Institutes of Health believe that “killing by itself is not morally wrong, although it is still morally wrong to cause total disability”.
Ultimately their aim is to justify organ donation after cardiac death (DCD). This is a state in which a patient is neurologically damaged and cannot function without a respirator. Within minutes of withdrawing this, the organs are removed. However, the authors state frankly that the patient is not dead at that point because it is possible that the patient’s heart could start beating again. (Other bioethicists disagree, vehemently.)
Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by Magnum007
That is fine for a round of philosophical discussion. In practice however that idea has always led to human suffering.
As to what I do to help others, talk about a straw man
As to priorities, ones loyalty has to be to family, community and country first or you will not have the resources to help anyone beyond that.
the priorities you mention are hardwired in our brains. we are animals that are hardwired to live in small groups which fight other small groups for food, water, shelter, the best grounds, and other life essentials...
today this hardwiring has been challenged and the fighting over food, water, shelter etc... has been replaced in the modern world with fighting over who has the best clothes, or the fastest car, or the biggest this or the best that...
we are still animals... we live, we die, and we must follow nature just as much as the rest of the animal kingdom does...
there is a reason why we have a messed up world today... it's because we think that we are better and deserve more...
we are the only creatures who believe that to live is not enough, that we need to "be happy"... that's BS
now that access to food and basic necessities is so easy, we need to find other things to do to keep us occupied... this makes people believe that they "deserve" to live...
well now... why should the weed die? why should the bacteria die? well... because we are cruel that's why! but are we really cruel? isn't cruelty something based on emotions also? the animal kingdom seems cruel as well...
Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by Blaine91555
Example:
I find killing animals, even hunting, morally wrong.
Society does not have an ethical dilemma with it.
Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by Blaine91555
There is an important difference between Humans and a plant. One of us has sentience/self-awareness, and the other does not. Humans aren't the only species on Earth to be self-aware imo, and that's why I find it highly immoral to hunt or kill certain species, such as dolphins etc.
Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
reply to post by Blaine91555
Without reading more, would bet they are UTILITARIAN bioethicists. That sort thinks that people that aren't "productive enough", "healthy enough", etc, should be killed, so they don't "waste resources". SICK thinking. Unfortunately, it seems to be catching, though. Just look at the anti-child trend you can see some places online. Anti-elderly. Anti-disabled. And so it goes. Same types that have been pushing for a LONG time now for "euthanasia centers" for people. Type that thinks they are better than all others, and that there is no value to life, treating people the same as weeds!