NationStates Jolt Archive

Yes, yet another topic on morals and such ;)

Which of the poll options do YOU consider to be the MOST morally objectionable ?

Feel free to explain your choice. And to tell us if you think some options are even praiseworthy...

There's no multi option :(

So I will have to go with raping a whore. Rape is the same thing as murder as far as I'm concerend, only the victim survives physically.

I'd say rape is the worst of the above.

I'm undecided between the rape and the killing, but at the end of the day I think killing someone is the worst.

Drug dealing in the slum by far.

I'm undecided between the rape and the killing, but at the end of the day I think killing someone is the worst.
It's pretty close either way.

Rape is 100% inexcusable.

Has to be the killing if it's not multi-choice. Just because you personally think someone should die does not mean that they are a bad person. See multiple abso fucking crazy dictatorships in the world. Rape second place, obv.

There's no multi option :(

Nope. One needs to pick the worst ;)
And can of course post the order of the rest here :)

Killing someone you personally believe should die MY #2 PICK

That's between you and your conception of God, morality, karma, what-have-you, but it's also illegal. Not to mention, many people have an appallingly low threshold for capital offenses. Do executioners always (or ever) personally believe their charges should die?

Dealing drugs in a slum

Sorry to be blunt, but that's supply and demand at work. WHY DO YOU HATE FREEDOM?

Beating a petty thief into the hospital

Sometimes unavoidable if you're in the throes of adrenaline and the thief was armed. Petty or not, fight-or-flight is elemental and fiercely impulsive. Simple solution = don't be a petty thief.

Raping a whoreMY #1 PICK

Never a positive spin on rape unless it's someone's fantasy, and only then if strict rules are in place. The fact that this hypothetical involves a "whore" means nothing, especially since I don't think there's anything wrong with charging money for pleasure. Why's it legal to watch them strip and pay for it but not to fuck them if they agree and charge a price? I'll never get that.

Stealing from a billionaire

Yawn. What? Oh -- no, not justified. Again, the disposition of the target simply doesn't matter. It isn't yours, it belongs to someone else. That's the frustrating thing about being the victim of theft. When my car was stolen in 2005, I would chase my own tail with the argument "it's NOT YOURS" -- sometimes even yelling it out loud. The utter childish idiocy of "I want that" followed by stealing it is just plain dumb. Dumber still was that in my case it was a beat-up 1991 Acura Integra whose book value was less than $1000 because of the two crashes it had been in. I needed it to get to work. Some fuckwad stole it to get the engine and probably sell it or drop it into a Civic. Beyond moron.

Reporting a family member to the police for a serious crime

Kinda the law, but I can see how hard that would be. Certainly not deplorable. I'm pretty sure Dostoevsky covered this, but given that family is a far more tangible bond than most laws... ...I suppose it would depend on which crime we're talking about here. I don't think I could cover a murder, but I'm not turning any family member in for trespassing, jaywalking or littering.

Defrauding your hated boss

Repeat much? Again, the target is not the issue.

Telling outright lies to convert someone to your view MY #3 PICK

It's the pinnacle of dishonesty to use falsehood to win a convert. Should the convert discover the lies, you've made something worse than someone who is merely unconverted or disinterested. You've made a foe. You've done your cause a deep disservice. You've also made yourself inherently untrustworthy. This is especially true if the conversion was religious in nature.

All options above are noble deeds, silly.

None of them are, but this was just a poll option.

Killing someone has got to be the worst by a long way. Rape is second of course. The reporting a family member one looks slightly out of place in that batch of choices in my opinion. The other options all involve breaking laws/rules whereas this one involves complying with it.

I picked the killing. Just because you believe someone should die does not mean you are right. Nor do you have the right to kill that person.

This is one of the reasons why assisted suicide is so confusing law wise.

Never a positive spin on rape unless it's someone's fantasy, and only then if strict rules are in place.

There's rules in fantasies now? However horrific the fantasy is, surely there are no rules to them? That's going the way of thoughtcrime.

There's rules in fantasies now? However horrific the fantasy is, surely there are no rules to them? That's going the way of thoughtcrime.

Please tell me you're not that dense.

Fantasies, bondage and related sexual activities are made safe with the inclusion of agreed-upon rules before the start of play. You must have heard the term "safe word", right? What is that but a rule?

Put away your Orwell and think a minute.

There's rules in fantasies now? However horrific the fantasy is, surely there are no rules to them? That's going the way of thoughtcrime.

Please tell me you're not that dense.

Fantasies, bondage and related sexual activities are made safe with the inclusion of agreed-upon rules before the start of play. You must have heard the term "safe word", right? What is that but a rule?


I think the posters assumption was of a fantasy that stays in ones head rather than one being acted out.

Fantasies, bondage and related sexual activities are made safe with the inclusion of agreed-upon rules before the start of play.

Yeah, but he was talking about rape in someone's fantasy.

Here's how i rank this lot of deeds:

1: Killing someone you personally believe should die
2: Beating a petty thief into the hospital
3: Raping a whore
4: Telling outright lies to convert someone to your view
5: Defrauding your hated boss
6: Stealing from a billionaire
7: Dealing drugs in a slum
8: Reporting a familymember to the police for a serious crime

In my book, crimes of violence are the worst deeds, then crimes of deception, then crimes of greed.

With the limited information we have, the rape is the worst, because there is absolutely no situation I can come up with in which that could possibly be anything but evil. The killing ranks in second only because there's a lot of leeway in why I "personally believe someone should die." If I personally believe they should die because they are currently holding 27 small children hostage and threatening to kill them all, that's a bit different than if I personally believe they should die because they belong to a race I find inferior.

I think the posters assumption was of a fantasy that stays in ones head rather than one being acted out.

Yeah, but he was talking about rape in someone's fantasy.

Wait, so you're saying it stops being called a fantasy when it gets acted out? Since when?

The "rules" I'm talking about are for fantasy or S/M play. Why is that hard to understand, and why did NNLDI have to run screaming to Orwell?

Sometimes unavoidable if you're in the throes of adrenaline and the thief was armed. Petty or not, fight-or-flight is elemental and fiercely impulsive. Simple solution = don't be a petty thief.

Odd that. By your own words, it doesn't matter who or what the target is for murder, rape & theft, but for violence, it suddenly does matter who or what the target is? Does not compute.
BTW, if the thief is armed, it isn't petty theft, it's armed robbery.

Wait, so you're saying it stops being called a fantasy when it gets acted out? Since when?

The "rules" I'm talking about are for fantasy or S/M play. Why is that hard to understand, and why did NNLDI have to run screaming to Orwell?

Acting out your fantasy is not implicit in the actual definition of fantasy itself, I can see where the confusion could arise.

Odd that. By your own words, it doesn't matter who or what the target is for murder, rape & theft, but for violence, it suddenly does matter who or what the target is? Does not compute.
BTW, if the thief is armed, it isn't petty theft, it's armed robbery.

Huh? Try again.

Who did I specify as a target in theft? All I said was, in response to "sending a petty thief to the hospital", that adrenaline can often speak in place of reasonable restraint.

You are right about armed robbery, though. Mea culpa.

Acting out your fantasy is not implicit in the actual definition of fantasy itself, I can see where the confusion could arise.

It isn't? Seems to me that there's no point in having a fantasy if there's not even a glimmer of hope that it might happen. Kinda like gambling, or more accurately, the lottery.

I can't help what semantic constraints some people are laboring under -- I was put off by the immediate rush to "thoughtcrime".

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/CIN/epicmovie~Epic-Movie-Posters.jpg

Now THAT, was a truly deplorable act.

Wait, so you're saying it stops being called a fantasy when it gets acted out? Since when?

The "rules" I'm talking about are for fantasy or S/M play. Why is that hard to understand, and why did NNLDI have to run screaming to Orwell?

No I'm not, so why am I being quoted? I was pointing out that I think that's what the other poster was assuming.

Huh? Try again.

Who did I specify as a target in theft? All I said was, in response to "sending a petty thief to the hospital", that adrenaline can often speak in place of reasonable restraint.

You said the target didn't matter in defrauding your hated boss, or stealing from a billionaire. Both are examples of theft.

Maybe someone might beat up a thief in an adrenaline rush, but that doesn't make the act any less deplorable in my book. In fact it rather sounds like the stereotypical defence of rape (or worse, requiring women to wear shape-conceiling clothing): my hormones got (will otherwise get) the better of me.

Speaking for myself, i was held up once, and told to hand over my money, under threat of a knife. I stood my ground, reacted when he feigned, but never at any point considered initiating violence. I walked away with my wallet & skin intact.

Reporting a family member, the greatest affront to decency is to tolerate a grass to live.

But if you snitch on a grass, wait, idk

Anyway, as morality is a subjective quality it means no more than that you like or don't like something. Besides which it offers no material benefit to believe in it.

My guidance in life is: If it feels good, do it, if it feels bad, do it anyway and medicate with vodka and painkillers

dealing drugs in a slum.

you should not traffic in human misery.

dealing drugs in a slum.

you should not traffic in human misery.
If I were in a slum, a good toke would do me a world of good.

If I were in a slum, a good toke would do me a world of good.
uhhuh

thats why slums are such cheery places.

I'm undecided between the rape and the killing, but at the end of the day I think killing someone is the worst.
I was in the same dilemma, but the rape option won out. I'm now sitting here wondering what, if anything, that choice says about me.

uhhuh

thats why slums are such cheery places.
There's much worse things to do with slums than drugs being dealt in them.

Such as: it is a slum.

There's much worse things to do with slums than drugs being dealt in them.

Such as: it is a slum.
yeah you could run a whorehouse featuring 13 year old girls but that wasnt an option on the list.

No I'm not, so why am I being quoted? I was pointing out that I think that's what the other poster was assuming.

You weren't quoted. Not by me anyway.

You said the target didn't matter in defrauding your hated boss, or stealing from a billionaire. Both are examples of theft.

Maybe someone might beat up a thief in an adrenaline rush, but that doesn't make the act any less deplorable in my book. In fact it rather sounds like the stereotypical defence of rape (or worse, requiring women to wear shape-conceiling clothing): my hormones got (will otherwise get) the better of me.

Speaking for myself, i was held up once, and told to hand over my money, under threat of a knife. I stood my ground, reacted when he feigned, but never at any point considered initiating violence. I walked away with my wallet & skin intact.

You were lucky.

I did say the target didn't matter in theft. That's different from fight-or-flight, because...y'know what? Never mind. It's not worth the effort.

Of those listed, I believe that raping a prostitute is the worst. Just because she's (or he, as the case may be) a sex worker doesn't suddenly mean that intercourse without consent is in any way acceptable.

Killing is unacceptable as well, but we get the impression that in this scenario, the person did something to "deserve" it. The prostitute, as far as we are aware, did nothing to deserve to get raped. Not that I think anyone deserves to get raped at all.

Dealing drugs requires a buyer who consents to purchasing said drugs, correct? Nowhere near as bad as rape then.

Beating a petty thief into the hospital. What is meant by "petty thief"? Is this someone who was trying to mug you or someone you caught in the act of stealing your TV? Either way, while violence is not "good," the thief was taking your stuff. Some anger is to be expected. He/she knowingly was committing a crime against you. A prostitute is committing a crime that has no victim. And in some places, she is committing no crime at all.

Stealing from a billionaire. Said billionaire quite likely engaged in some fairly nefarious business practices. Even if he/she did not, they'll hardly miss the money, as one couldn't get away with stealing all that much compared to their vast wealth. And I could use that money more than they could. Wrong, yes. Wrong on the scale of rape? Fuck, gods no.

I would be very torn if I was in a position to report a family member to the police. I have a very close family, and I'm very loyal. They'd have to be seriously a very high danger to everyone around them for me to do so. And I'd still probably be very upset about it, crying probably. But if necessary, I'd do it, and it would be right.

I would defraud a hated boss, if I knew how and could get away with it. I don't think it can even really be compared with the crime of raping someone.

I think it's both wrong and risky to tell lies in order to convert people to your view. Because then they're pissed at you if they discover you've lied to them. However, it's not nearly as wrong as raping someone. Not even a hundredth as bad.

I thought this was multi-option when I voted.

I guess if I have to pick one the rape one.


All I have to say is who the fuck thought the stealing from the billionare one was the worst?

I went with killing, just over the rape. Pretty close though.

All I have to say is who the fuck thought the stealing from the billionare one was the worst?

Well, it's a public poll so... 'Rynyl' thought it was the worst!

My intent was, naturally, honorable. That's why the above are all noble deeds, silly. :p

I thought this was multi-option when I voted.

I guess if I have to pick one the rape one.


All I have to say is who the fuck thought the stealing from the billionare one was the worst?

Yeah... that really doesn't make any sense... worse than killing and rape? I don't get how anyone could think that, seriously.

Yeah... that really doesn't make any sense... worse than killing and rape? I don't get how anyone could think that, seriously.

Some people care about money more than human life and dignity.

All I have to say is who the fuck thought the stealing from the billionare one was the worst?

Well, five people said that all of the options are noble deeds.

Why isn't there an all of the above option?

I decided to pick the joke option.

Well, five people said that all of the options are noble deeds.

Yes, but to be fair, that was a clear joke option, and I considered voting for it.

Some people care about money more than human life and dignity.

I guess so. I voted for the rape one. It seemed the worst to me.

Of those that are always wrong, rape is the worst.

#1: The rape is the worst. Doesn't matter who the victim is, rape is rape. There can never be any justification for it under any circumstances.

#2: Killing someone you think deserves it came in a close second. There are occasions where it can be justifiable to kill someone, as with self-defense/defense of another. Thinking someone deserves to be killed, though, is a different story. I suppose one could think a war criminal or a serial killer "deserves" it and thus feel justified in killing them, but people can/do claim the "they deserved it" argument for killing anyone they have a grudge against. And to my mind, regardless of justification, if it's murder, then it's murder.

#3: Beating a petty thief into the hospital. I put that one higher than others on the grounds that petty thievery is stuff like picking pockets or shoplifting, and that kind of violence is too severe for the nature of the crime. Property crime never justifies physical violence, in my opinion. I would never get so angry over stuff that I would attack someone.

#4: Telling outright lies to convert someone to your view. This is a particularly vicious kind of lying. However, it carries with it its own punishment, when you get found out.

#5: Shared by stealing from the billionaire and defrauding the boss. Theft and fraud are crimes, regardless of who you do them to.

#6: Dealing drugs in a slum. Again, it's a crime no matter where you do it, so, regardless of whether you think it should be a crime or not, doing it is unethical. Also, the kinds of gang-driven drug dealing that usually goes on in slums supports a larger, very violent, criminal system. However, there can be justifications for dealing drugs, both economic and social.

The only one I thought would be praiseworthy is the turning in a family member to the police if they commit a serious crime. I took "serious crime" to mean something like rape, murder, aggravated assault, armed robbery, etc. Something where somebody got seriously hurt or killed.

I was in the same dilemma, but the rape option won out. I'm now sitting here wondering what, if anything, that choice says about me.

It says that you think rape is worse than murder. Although there are disparities in the victims. In this scenario, we are given the impression that the person getting murdered has done something to partially (murder can never be fully justified) deserve it (like for instance, raping someone). The person getting raped has done nothing really wrong except take money for sex.

The way I read it, the killing option struck me as sounding like a vigilante, which is just another form of murder, so I picked that.

A lot of people say rape is worse than murder. I do not agree. I think a lot of people react to rape with stronger emotions, but I wonder if that isn't because we're so desensitized to killing each other by our pop culture and media. I mean after all, you can go to a PG rated movie in which there's a murder as long as you don't see it happen or if it isn't violent.

The way I read it, the killing option struck me as sounding like a vigilante, which is just another form of murder, so I picked that.

A lot of people say rape is worse than murder. I do not agree. I think a lot of people react to rape with stronger emotions, but I wonder if that isn't because we're so desensitized to killing each other by our pop culture and media. I mean after all, you can go to a PG rated movie in which there's a murder as long as you don't see it happen or if it isn't violent.
If you read the posts of those who ranked the rape option as worse than the killing option, you will see that several of us have made the argument that, since the poll did not specify "murder" that leaves possible room for such justifications as self defense/defense of another. The point is that it is possible in some circumstances (though very few) to find justifications for killing a person. However, there is NO justification under any circumstances for raping a person. On that basis, the rape edged out the killing by a narrow margin for many of us.

Agree with Mur, killing has justification at times, rape never does.

Also Mur, check your TGs.

Agree with Mur, killing has justification at times, rape never does.

Also Mur, check your TGs.
Answered. :)

If you read the posts of those who ranked the rape option as worse than the killing option, you will see that several of us have made the argument that, since the poll did not specify "murder" that leaves possible room for such justifications as self defense/defense of another. The point is that it is possible in some circumstances (though very few) to find justifications for killing a person. However, there is NO justification under any circumstances for raping a person. On that basis, the rape edged out the killing by a narrow margin for many of us.

Yes I know, which is why I specified my reasoning. Not everyone who voted rape qualified it the way you did, and it was to them that my comments referred.