This might just be the silliest, most absurd question I've ever asked -- and I've asked a few in my time -- but here it goes anyway:
Is there a moral difference between killing someone in self-defense and raping someone in self-defense?
The notion of raping someone in self-defense is horriffic, of course, if not a downright impossibility. I won't pretent that such an action can actually exist. But then what of killing someone? How is that more morally justified than raping them? How can killing someone in self-defense justifiably exist?
In the words of William Munny,
It's a hell of a thing killin' a man. You take away all he's got, and all
he's ever gonna have.
Killing a man is the last straw. There's nothing you can do to him after that, or at least nothing he'll care about anyway. So why is it tolerated under certain conditions, either by law or our own consciences? Any suggestions, apart from urging me to seek professional help?
No comments:
Post a Comment