Morality of killing?

Question

How is it decided if it is moral to kill or not? I'm not talking just about humans, I'm talking about everything. No one cares if I kill a mosquito...this is actually a goverment supported act, they kill them by the thousands. However, if I killed a dog...I better have a darn good reason for doing so...like the dog is attacking a child. Is it the size of the animal, is it the domestication? I don't think it is the size, if I saw a tiger walking in my neighborhood...I don't think I would be demonized if I shot it...being that it could be dangerous. I don't think it has to do with danger either...any stray dog I see could pose a danger to my children. No one would care if I step on an ant outside. Kids do this all the time, no one really cares do they? What about if a child decides to go and kill a beautiful butterfly? Is that different than them stepping on an ant?

Continued in Details below...

What if you about to build a deck on your house, and discovered a colony of ants...would you have a problem destroying to continue building? Or would you let them be and build somewhere else? What if instead of ants it was a family of cute bunnies?

So what are your ideas, what makes one worse than the other? I can't believe anyone will say that they are all the same. And I also don't think anyone would say they are all wrong, I would assume everyone has killed something in their life. What is it that puts a higher or lesser moral value on killing something?

Also, would you please state your religious standpoint(Christian, Muslim, Pagan, Atheist, etc.)?

zienzman, Solo, and Soulful Kris. I admire that, and I would like to say I am the same...but I know I am not. I am to a point...but what do you do if you have 100s of ants coming into your kitchen? How do you deal with that without killing them? Technically they are not threatening your life...they are just pesty.

gorgeous: No, I'm not leading up to abortion...hadn't even thought about it till you mentioned it.

But this is interesting: "To me killing a butterfly is sad while killing an ant is not in the least. It is no different, technically, though."

This is why I asked, I kinda feel the same way ...and I don't know why. I have no logical reason for thinking this way. That is why I wanted to know what others thought.

You mentioned dog fighting and "roster" fighting...what do you think about cricket fighting? It is an actual sport, why don't people feel the same about that?

Answer 1

I can't answer how "we" decide. I can only answer for myself.

I think killing should always have a purpose. For instance, we need to eat. We also desire to be comfortable and to have our own space. Ergo, I kill mosquitoes so they don't bite me and I set mousetraps when mice get into our basement. I do not kill the mice when they are outside, because there's nothing to be gained from that.

Death is a part of life. I wouldn't think a lion was evil if it tried to eat me. It becomes questionable when done without reason (children stomping on anthills) and outright wrong when done specifically to inflict pain (children pulling wings off of flies). At best, death without purpose is wasteful. While I have nothing against hunters, I do find it rather despicable when they kill an animal and let the meat just rot. They should either eat it or give (or sell) it to someone who will.

I'm Wiccan, for the record.

Answer 2

Interesting question.

In case you are leading up to abortion, lets say we are not talking about anything that is inside it's mothers uterus.

I am for the death penalty. You kill a child or a cop you should die for it.

I could never kill an animal but if a hunter eats the kill I will not hold it against him.

I think that people who participate in dogs or co.ck fights are the scum of the earth and the penalty should be much more severe than it is. Animal cruelty should come with severe punishment.

To me killing a butterfly is sad while killing an ant is not in the least. It is no different, technically, though.

You cannot make a blanket statement. 'Thou shall not kill'. We kill for food everyday. The biblical god was probably the most prolific mass murderer in history, if the bible is to be believed. Clearly he had no problem with murder.


Agnostic deist.

Answer 3

In past times I have killed people by shooting them, laying explosives and once with a machete. It was my job, my orders were very specific and if these people had continued to live many others would now be dead. The morality of what I was doing never entered into it even though later on it would help confirm my atheism

Edit* On reflection I think of it this way. Knowing that I can do something is not the same as doing it. I have nothing to prove, my sense of self worth is not elevated by inflicting suffering on other creatures and I derive absolutely no pleasure from it (Michael Vick please take note)
Could I shoot a tiger walking down a suburban street? Yes I could.
Would I shoot that same tiger if there was another option which didn't endanger myself and others? No

Answer 4

It all comes down to how useful the particular animal is to us. For example, if I kill a horse, it's a higher crime than killing a small rodent, because the horse provides us with many things that a rodent would not.

Close relationships can also play a big role. If I killed a domesticated dog, it would be more serious than if I killed a wild wolf, because the dog is (or has the potential to be) loved and cared for by an owner.

In other words, if I kill something that is of no use (or is dangerous) to humans, then there's no reason for the government to get all upset about it.

Answer 5

Society decides and they decide the conditions. Pets are treated like humans and so are larger farm animals because of domestication - if a wild bear attacked you, no one would fault you for killing it.

I consciously attempt to not harm anything - not even insects. I will trap bees and wasps and let them go outside. If a nest is built on my home, my husband will remove it because he has allergies to them and that is his choice. I do not tell others how they should dictate their conscience. I also was not the type of child that killed anything just because..I've always had a great respect for the natural world around me.

I'm a pacifist and that is the one thing I really got from my Quaker ancestors. The law will dictate the general guidelines everyone needs to follow and I do not see it as my place to project my particular type of morality on others - they are adults and can make their own decisions as such.

Answer 6

I'm an atheist, so I'm free to ponder this question without reference to a lot of superstitious mumbo-jumbo.

On the most basic level, every living thing lives at the expense of its environment. But of course you're talking about the moral implications of deliberate acts of (perhaps) unnecessary killing on the part of humans.

Basically, the Wiccan paraphrase of Crowley - "An it harm none, do what ye wilt" - pretty much sums it up as far as I'm concerned. This excludes senseless acts of killing. In the case of the dog attacking the child, I'd argue that it's "moral" to defend the child from the attack, even though the dog of course cannot be held morally accountable.

Answer 7

Personally, I don't kill anything on purpose, I may accidently step on the occasional bug... but I respect ALL life equally. No matter what it is, I don't kill ants, mosquitos or even animals that wish to cause me harm unless I absolutely had to. Not only that but I believe that animal life is more precious than most human life (not all, but most) as in most situations they cannot defend themselves. Hunting, breeding, all that jazz... consider me vehemently against it (with the exception of hunting for survival, as that is natures intention.)

Answer 8

Although all life is sacred, life lives off life,however what is appalling is when people are murdered by the hundreds of thousands because some world leader thinks he was instructed by a Supreme Being to slaughter people in a different country!!

Answer 9

Interesting question. I guess there would be some corrolation between the size of the animal and the morality of killing it. Other considerations would be the "intelligence" of the animal.

Answer 10

I'm an atheist. I don't think anything sentient should be killed by anything else. So my stand is: I discriminate based on sentience.

note: I don't think anything should be killed to the point of that species extinction.