Everyone-- a morality question?

Question

Is it right to affect someone's life adversely if that person is not hurting you or anyone else with their actions? If someone hurts no one but themselves, wouldn't it be immoral to interfere in their lives to make them abide by your belief system?

***Oh, sorry-- I'm not talking about suicide. I'm just talking about life choices.

Ok guys...I'm meaning something that's not physically damaging-- just something you'd view as wrong. Would it be right to force change upon someone because your view of them is immoral?

Answer 1

It's very rare if ever that someone's immorality (if their actions were immoral that is) does not effect others around them....even if they do not realize it at the time. But to answer the question, one would really need to know a specific scenario I think....(But any infringement upon their general freewill, if their actions were truly not harmful to anyone else, would be immoral...yes)

Answer 2

If I have a friend who does drugs, and disposes of all needles properly, etc, and never acts with violence, I would feel it would be my responsibility to offer whatever help or support that I could.... ie love, guidance and motivation.

The idea that a person has a right to hurt themselves, so long as they hurt no-one else, is false, as it is impossible to hurt yourself without affecting other people.

For instance, if my friend had not chosen to become a drug user (however responsible she is with needle disposal), she could have become a hairdresser, earning her own way in society, and helping to brighten other people's days with her cheerful conversation. With her spare money she could have helped the poor, who don't even have food.

If the proferred help was not useful or helpful, people will call it "interference" or "forcing their beliefs."

For instance, a church goer who thinks to be helpful by pointing out another person's failings, may sincerely think they are doing the right thing. But behind those hurtful words is often a heart that has a very luke-warm commitment to the welfare of the person to whom the advice was given.

I suggest that what is immoral is to offer half-hearted "help"... ie to offer advice without also offering love and support.

Answer 3

I would have to ask you to specify "affect someone's live adversely" just a little. It seems deceptively vague.

As a parent, I have to routinely "ruin" my child's life, "interfere" with some of the kid plans, etc. Even if she hurts no-one else, she could hurt herself, and it would be callous of me to stand by and let her do that!

While that is obviously my job as a parent, isn't is also my job as a friend, neighbor, or co-worker? If I see my neighbor starting to hang herself in her kitchen, shouldn't I act? If my co-worker is getting involved in dangerous drugs, should I mind my own business? If my friend's husband, a recovering alcoholic, stops in at a local bar for a drink, should I look the other way and mind my own business?

Nobody on earth exists in a vaccuum. All of our actions affect the people in our lives, both those we know and those we don't know. It isn't compassion to look the other way while someone (who doesn't believe as I do) hurts himself or herself, it is callousness. I don't think an act of passion or compassion qualifies as "making someone abide by my belief system". I think it is acting within the confines of my belief system, which demands I love all others, including my enemies.

Love is concern. Love is action. Love is a verb.

Answer 4

Yes I'd consider that immoral. It saddens me to see people hurt themselve and I'll gently advise them (maybe) but if they weren't interested I'd leave them be.
I'm doing something some people consider 'wrong'. I don't mind the advise but when people get pushy and tell me I 'have' to change, it hurts. And I wouldn't want to inflict that on anyone else. It's not a nice feeling.

Edit: there are some instances where I'd interfer. For example my cousin has schizophrenia and when he had a severe psychotic episode (completely delusional and halucinating) I took steps to ensure he got the help he need because I cared about him. But that's an extreme case. Generally I keep out of it.

Answer 5

As a former paramedic, I would have to say that we all have a responsibility to protect those who are trying to injure themselves. We should ALL take the position that if a reasonable and prudent person would not commit a particular act (in this case self-injury), then that person needs to be protected from his/her actions.

Those persons who are not rational or mentally competent should NOT be left unprotected.

This would be more of a social responsibility than a religious/belief system one.

Answer 6

Let's see if my reaing between the lines is accurate; you're once again implying this of....Christians???

If so, exactly how do they "force" someone to abide by their belief system?? Can anyone who makes these generalizations ever, just once, give an example of this instead of just beating around the bush with assumption after assumption??

Answer 7

None of us can make anyone "abide" by our religious beliefs, we can however offer an opinion if we see that person on a course that could eventually hurt them in some way.

Whether or not they accept the advise is solely up to them...all we can do is offer it in love and pray that they come to their senses and re-adjust their course.

Answer 8

It is immoral always to discuss anything with anybody on matters other than related to soul uplifting.

If someone thinks that my statement is hurting you, so be it!

The day we start doing that in real earnest, we will be free from our depressions and opressions.

Answer 9

It is immoral to "make" others do anything. That is called manipulation. If you want to try to help them change their mind about something, the best thing you can do is influence them with your actions.

Answer 10

well, religion aside...if I knew someone was going to commit suicide, I would try to help them. But I'm not sure that's what you were getting at...but then I don't think someone's religious beliefs or lack there of really hurt them.