Moving Forward Inc wrote:This is interesting.
4 opinions so far, all of which are different.Gauntleted Fist wrote:I don't think it is morally correct to kill anyone, ever. So the answer to all of your questions would be no. Including the one about punishing people for supporting such a person.
I agree with you on the 3rd point.
But would you still think it morally incorrect to kill someone even if you knew that such a person would kill others if you did not kill them, especially if they have already killed others?Neu California wrote:Not unless all other methods of getting them out of office had been exhausted, and they were doing a lot of active damage to their country.
What would you consider "alot of active damage to their country"?
And if all other methods of getting them out of office have not been used, how does that justify letting them live.The United Soviet Socialist Republic wrote:NO! Murder is wrong. That person would rightfully rule that nation, killing him/her wouldnt solve anything.
Would you say murder is wrong if the person you would be killing was a murderer who was going to go out and kill even more people?
And how can you say that a person who tramples on individual rights (Life liberty property pursuit of happiness equality under the law) is a rightful ruler?
For an example, I would take an issue YOU are sensitive about.
Because he is democratically elected?
Because he declares himself to be?
One or (preferably) more of the following:
1. economic collapse
2. a lot of infrastructure in an unusable or nearunusable state.
3. active genocide.
4. armies beating at the door of the nation
5. Actively suppressing any dissident opinions
6. The vast majority living in squalor, while a select few get special treatment from the government.