Their deaths wouldn’t be on my conscience. I’m not the one doing the killing.
:rolleyes:
[QUOTE=StveG1]
My “prime goal” would be to survive.
[/QUOTE]
As would mine - up to a point.
[QUOTE=StveG1]
There is nothing immoral in trying to stay alive.
[/QUOTE]
Not in itself, but I believe “The ends justify the means” is morally abhorrent.
[QUOTE=StveG1]
So according to you, it would be wrong to fight and maybe kill soemone, even if that someone could/would go on to kill more people?
[/QUOTE]
Yes
[QUOTE=StveG1]
To simply lay down and let things happen when you could have stopped it, is the immoral thing to do.
[/QUOTE]
I said nothing about laying down and letting things happen. I have yet to experience a situation where deadly violence was the only possible solution to a problem.
[QUOTE=StveG1]
And to be clear here, I am not talking about deliberately murdering an assailant or threat (that has already been subdued or ran away), I am talking about the basic biological imperative of survival.
[/QUOTE]
Well, I guess my sense of self matters more to me than brute survival. I not only want to live, but I want to live with myself, too.
I’m not saying I won’t automatically react my hand if struck, by the way. But at any point where thought enters into it (as it must, in the example of the woman in the OP, as well as my real-life experience), I would choose nonviolence.