BBC presenter confesses to mercy killing

[Puckoon]

The way I see it, all killing is wrong and can never be justified.  Call it simplistic if you want, fine by me 

I will stand by what I believe

Thats simplistic.

[Fiodoir Ard Mhacha]

Until 1961, suicide was illegal in Britain. How stupid was that - what, are you going to charge someone who has killed themselves?

There is a campaign for a judicial review which could decide if a mercy killing is legal or not.  I don't believe in people taking the law into their own hands, nor should someone be allowed to die if they feel a wee bit down recently, but there needs to be some legal decision on when the law will allow this.

Morally, I'm very uncomfortable with the whole idea and sometimes it's where you need your faith to help you decide what is right and what is wrong.  But are we to condemn people for killing themselves of their own volition? Definitely not.

[ardmhachaabu]

The way I see it, all killing is wrong and can never be justified.  Call it simplistic if you want, fine by me 

I will stand by what I believe

Thats simplistic.

I won't argue that, it's just how I see it

[theskull1]

The way I see it, all killing is wrong and can never be justified.  Call it simplistic if you want, fine by me 

I will stand by what I believe

Thats simplistic.

I won't argue that, it's just how I see it

It's just easier that way isn't it

Must be great living in your certain world ardmhachaabu

[Puckoon]

The way I see it, all killing is wrong and can never be justified.  Call it simplistic if you want, fine by me 

I will stand by what I believe

Thats simplistic.

I won't argue that, it's just how I see it

But I think you know deep down its not that simple. If someone is pointing a gun at your child, and your choice is to watch that child be killed or kill that person, you know what you would do. And you wouldnt be wrong, or a sinner, or necessarily going to hell.

So if there is even only one example where it isnt that black and white, then you have to admit there is at least one shade of grey (although the reality is that there are maybe thousands of shades of grey).

[The Iceman]

The way I see it, all killing is wrong and can never be justified.  Call it simplistic if you want, fine by me 

I will stand by what I believe

Thats simplistic.

I won't argue that, it's just how I see it

But I think you know deep down its not that simple. If someone is pointing a gun at your child, and your choice is to watch that child be killed or kill that person, you know what you would do. And you wouldnt be wrong, or a sinner, or necessarily going to hell.

So if there is even only one example where it isnt that black and white, then you have to admit there is at least one shade of grey (although the reality is that there are maybe thousands of shades of grey).

Just because you think you are justified Puck doesn't mean you are.
Lots of people can be "justified" in their actions but it doesn't make it ok.  You have made it quite clear your position on the troubles and the armed struggle in particular  - both sides of the equation believe they are "justified" but its black and white in these cases right?

You really have to look at this from a distance and not get emotionally involved.  It's a black and white issue.
Killing is killing is killing

[Puckoon]

Couldnt disagree more Iceman - maybe Ill try and explain, if you will bear with me.

I cannot for one second agree with the suggestion that the justification of the armed struggle in Ireland is the same as walking into a situation where someone is seconds away from killing my child. There may have been reactionary situations in the troubles, for sure - but these things took planning, and calculations.

This discussion is not about my opinions on the troubles, or the fact that I try to think pacifistically (does that word exist)? There to me, is a difference in the calculated violence of the armed struggle, and trying to use a suitable example to make a point regarding the lack of black and white when it comes to killing.

Granted, situations like this dont arise very often, and pretty much all of the time, killing is killing is killing and is wrong.

There are situations however (and Im not saying that this IS one of them, as the buck doesnt stop with me) where the explanation of one human taking the life of another, isnt so clear cut.

Id have full confidence that if there is a God, and he does judge us at the end, then this mans actions should be understood.

I dont think you would let someone walk into your house and murder your family, and if you had to kill them to stop them, you would do it without a second thought. Its human nature to protect ones self and it is reactionary. On the same hand I dont expect you to go out looking for someone who broke into your house and stole things that belong to you and put a bullet in their heads. One would be very wrong and one would be less wrong (and in the opinion of some, the right thing to do).

[ardmhachaabu]

puck, I understand where you are coming from.  I still don't agree but I do understand

[pintsofguinness]

It's a pity the rest of us can't live in the same world you boys live in if you think killing is never justified or necessary. 

It's a good job others were around to do the fighting for yous or God knows what sort of a society or country we'd have, we'd probably be speaking German for a start. 

[Puckoon]

As opposed to English? 

[Tony Baloney]

It's a pity the rest of us can't live in the same world you boys live in if you think killing is never justified or necessary. 

It's a good job others were around to do the fighting for yous or God knows what sort of a society or country we'd have, we'd probably be speaking German for a start.

What would have been wrong with that? Freed from British occupation at last, there would have been no Troubles as we know them.

[pintsofguinness]

It's a pity the rest of us can't live in the same world you boys live in if you think killing is never justified or necessary. 

It's a good job others were around to do the fighting for yous or God knows what sort of a society or country we'd have, we'd probably be speaking German for a start.

What would have been wrong with that? Freed from British occupation at last, there would have been no Troubles as we know them.

Whole other set of problems under a Nazi regime though wouldn't there, or whatever other dictator we'd have. 

We'd probably be killing the sick and the disabled, the gays and the travelers would be long gone,  probably no religions so some on the board would be happy.

[longrunsthefox]

The way I see it, all killing is wrong and can never be justified.  Call it simplistic if you want, fine by me 

I will stand by what I believe

Thats simplistic.

I won't argue that, it's just how I see it

But I think you know deep down its not that simple. If someone is pointing a gun at your child, and your choice is to watch that child be killed or kill that person, you know what you would do. And you wouldnt be wrong, or a sinner, or necessarily going to hell.

So if there is even only one example where it isnt that black and white, then you have to admit there is at least one shade of grey (although the reality is that there are maybe thousands of shades of grey).

Just because you think you are justified Puck doesn't mean you are.
Lots of people can be "justified" in their actions but it doesn't make it ok.  You have made it quite clear your position on the troubles and the armed struggle in particular  - both sides of the equation believe they are "justified" but its black and white in these cases right?

You really have to look at this from a distance and not get emotionally involved.  It's a black and white issue.
Killing is killing is killing

Are you Maggie Thatcher?... 'a crime is a crime is a crime'   I can't see how it's black and white... the Yorkshire Ripper who went out on a serial killing spree for several years is hardly the same as someone gets if a fight, punches someone and they die after hitting their head on the kerb which has happened. Loads of other examples too... regarding motives, crimes of passion, insanity etc.   

[pintsofguinness]

regarding motives, crimes of passion,

so if you kill someone with a good motive you're not as bad as the yorkshire ripper?

would you mind telling me what motives you'd consider to be ok for killing someone?

[Puckoon]

The way I see it, all killing is wrong and can never be justified.  Call it simplistic if you want, fine by me 

I will stand by what I believe

Thats simplistic.

I won't argue that, it's just how I see it

But I think you know deep down its not that simple. If someone is pointing a gun at your child, and your choice is to watch that child be killed or kill that person, you know what you would do. And you wouldnt be wrong, or a sinner, or necessarily going to hell.

So if there is even only one example where it isnt that black and white, then you have to admit there is at least one shade of grey (although the reality is that there are maybe thousands of shades of grey).

Just because you think you are justified Puck doesn't mean you are.
Lots of people can be "justified" in their actions but it doesn't make it ok.  You have made it quite clear your position on the troubles and the armed struggle in particular  - both sides of the equation believe they are "justified" but its black and white in these cases right?

You really have to look at this from a distance and not get emotionally involved.  It's a black and white issue.
Killing is killing is killing

Are you Maggie Thatcher?... 'a crime is a crime is a crime'   I can't see how it's black and white... the Yorkshire Ripper who went out on a serial killing spree for several years is hardly the same as someone gets if a fight, punches someone and they die after hitting their head on the kerb which has happened. Loads of other examples too... regarding motives, crimes of passion, insanity etc.

The difference would be minimal to me there fox in fairness. If you're going to go out acting the **** and throwing punches you need to accept the fact that you might cause someones death.