What's worse: A Religious murder or An economic murder?

[kNIOKAS]

What in your opinion is worse - a murder commited due to religious beliefs or a murder commited for economic gains? Which one is more moral? Would you be more pissed if some religious fanatic killed your relative because his beliefs told so, or if a robber shot your relative to pick his pockets?

I wonder.

[Giaodollo]

Murder is murder and should never be justified unless in certain circumstances (rape or other extreme cases), but economic murder I can be a bit lenient on if said person is trying to rob me.

There is no justification for murdering someone for something that was written centuries ago in a book.

[Jailblazers7]

A murder due to religion always seems worse to me simply because I flat out can't understand it. At least I can understand the motives of a murder inspired by economic motives.

[Nowitness]

Murder is murder and should never be justified unless in certain circumstances (rape or other extreme cases), but economic murder I can be a bit lenient on if said person is trying to rob me.

There is no justification for murdering someone for something that was written centuries ago in a book.

It's never okay. If you're suggesting capital punishment giving the state that much power is both dangerous and completely distorting what government was designed to do.

But both are equally bad. I can see why someone would murder for both reasons.

[AkronAngel]

They are equally bad IMO.

[Giaodollo]

It's never okay. If you're suggesting capital punishment giving the state that much power is both dangerous and completely distorting what government was designed to do.

But both are equally bad. I can see why someone would murder for both reasons.

I never spoke about capital punishment and the government. What I would be doing in those cases wouldn't even be labelled under murder if we are to get technical about it considering I have justification. If I saw someone being raped I'd try to the subdue the offender with any means necessary.

[Nowitness]

I never spoke about capital punishment and the government. What I would be doing in those cases wouldn't even be labelled under murder if we are to get technical about it considering I have justification. If I saw someone being raped I'd try to the subdue the offender with any means necessary.

Fair enough. I agree with that viewpoint. :cheers:

[fiddy]

A murder due to religion always seems worse to me simply because I flat out can't understand it. At least I can understand the motives of a murder inspired by economic motives.
This

[NumberSix]

I never spoke about capital punishment and the government. What I would be doing in those cases wouldn't even be labelled under murder if we are to get technical about it considering I have justification. If I saw someone being raped I'd try to the subdue the offender with any means necessary.
And that wouldn't be "murder".

[Giaodollo]

And that wouldn't be "murder".

The technincal term would be homocide or manslaughter depending on circumstances.

[kNIOKAS]

Murder is murder and should never be justified unless in certain circumstances (rape or other extreme cases), but economic murder I can be a bit lenient on if said person is trying to rob me.

There is no justification for murdering someone for something that was written centuries ago in a book.
So in essence you prefer the murdered getting something material back for his deed rather than something non-material?


A murder due to religion always seems worse to me simply because I flat out can't understand it. At least I can understand the motives of a murder inspired by economic motives.
Is this the very cultural phenomenom of punishing the unpredictability in people? Like you sort of understand one type of behaviour, but you do not welcome somebody that acts in a way that you do not understand thefore cannot forsee and plan to defend against?

[Giaodollo]

So in essence you prefer the murdered getting something material back for his deed rather than something non-material?


Is this the very cultural phenomenom of punishing the unpredictability in people? Like you sort of understand one type of behaviour, but you do not welcome somebody that acts in a way that you do not understand thefore cannot forsee and plan to defend against?

I was speaking of myself personally and I guess if someone is robbing ME and puts me and people around me in danger I could see justification. That would be and economic murder I guess.

But if someone is robbing me and I could avoid bloodsheed I'd do everything nessecery to avoid it. Material things isn't worth the risk of your life.

[kNIOKAS]

I was speaking of myself personally and I guess if someone is robbing ME and puts me and people around me in danger I could see justification. That would be and economic murder I guess.

But if someone is robbing me and I could avoid bloodsheed I'd do everything nessecery to avoid it. Material things isn't worth the risk of your life.
I'm saying you see your life being worth of money but not being worth of an idea?

[SugarHill]

I'm saying you see your life being worth of money but not being worth of an idea?
yo

http://i.imgur.com/8xc8XJS.gif

[Giaodollo]

I'm saying you see your life being worth of money but not being worth of an idea?

A religious idea is not something I have very close affiliation with, so yes I rather protect something that actually has value and means something in my life.

[~primetime~]

one is confused, misguided, brainwashed, etc...the other is greedy, evil, unloving, etc

[Akrazotile]

I'm saying you see your life being worth of money but not being worth of an idea?


Murdering for economic reasons is more or less a primal function of nature, and almost anyone in dire enough circumstances would probably do it (as in stuck on a desert island with other people and limited fresh water etc) Of course, most people who commit murder in our world are not doing it for survival, but rather for socioeconomic advancement.

Murdering for a religious purpose tends to carry a psychological connotation that is more of an outlier for the general population.

I'm not sure why youre asking which is worse. Neither is morally superior to he other. Just products of different mindsets.

[Draz]

Their both equally as bad if you aren't a psychopath

[kNIOKAS]

A religious idea is not something I have very close affiliation with, so yes I rather protect something that actually has value and means something in my life.
You phrased it wrong here... I wasn't talking about protecting anything, but rather giving it up. You would rather give your life for money than for a religious idea?


Murdering for economic reasons is more or less a primal function of nature, and almost anyone in dire enough circumstances would probably do it (as in stuck on a desert island with other people and limited fresh water etc) Of course, most people who commit murder in our world are not doing it for survival, but rather for socioeconomic advancement.

Murdering for a religious purpose tends to carry a psychological connotation that is more of an outlier for the general population.

I'm not sure why youre asking which is worse. Neither is morally superior to he other. Just products of different mindsets.
Ok that's right. Where I'm going is that murdering for money is egoistical and an attempt to profit off of somebody's life, while murdering for religion is not aimed at getting material goods, and not as egoistic.


Their both equally as bad if you aren't a psychopath
What does it change then? Is it better to be killed by somebody who's plotting to take over your belongings or is it better to be killed by a serial killer?

[Jailblazers7]

So in essence you prefer the murdered getting something material back for his deed rather than something non-material?


Is this the very cultural phenomenom of punishing the unpredictability in people? Like you sort of understand one type of behaviour, but you do not welcome somebody that acts in a way that you do not understand thefore cannot forsee and plan to defend against?

I think you are sort of correct. It's basically the quote, "We fear what we don't understand." A religious murder is just something I don't get so it feels more shocking and unpredictable to me.

[Draz]

You phrased it wrong here... I wasn't talking about protecting anything, but rather giving it up. You would rather give your life for money than for a religious idea?


Ok that's right. Where I'm going is that murdering for money is egoistical and an attempt to profit off of somebody's life, while murdering for religion is not aimed at getting material goods, and not as egoistic.


What does it change then? Is it better to be killed by somebody who's plotting to take over your belongings or is it better to be killed by a serial killer?
I don't want to be killed :rolleyes:

By serial killer you meant to say religious kook?
Than I rather be killed god forbid by a person who's struggling to survive. It's basic instincts that's traveling back since we were evolving to kill to survive. That and to protect our children and family by all means.

To me, to avoid all conflict of saying why murder for religion, my argument would be why would religion involve the murdering of another life to begin with.

[kNIOKAS]

I don't want to be killed :rolleyes:

By serial killer you meant to say religious kook?
Than I rather be killed god forbid by a person who's struggling to survive. It's basic instincts that's traveling back since we were evolving to kill to survive. That and to protect our children and family by all means.

To me, to avoid all conflict of saying why murder for religion, my argument would be why would religion involve the murdering of another life to begin with.
Well people murder for other ideas, too - like for the country. It's not far fetched to ask why living in a country involve killing other human beings.

Also, I didn't mean a robber, probably. Say in a bank robbery - with the M4's and big bags for money... Or somebody just mugging other one till death - like those meatheads from the gym that tried to squeeze the owner of a profitable hotline service (movie with Rock and Wahlberg based on that story).

[Rizko]

Ok that's right. Where I'm going is that murdering for money is egoistical and an attempt to profit off of somebody's life, while murdering for religion is not aimed at getting material goods, and not as egoistic.
Disagree. People dont have to attain material wealth from something for it to be an inherently egotistical act.

Theres a lot of egocentric killing in the name of religion. I dont feel like getting into a huge debate but you seem smart and with just a little reflection itll become self evident.

Tho I tend to view most things the humans do as inherently self-serving. Its a fundamental aspect of life.

[kNIOKAS]

Disagree. People dont have to attain material wealth from something for it to be an inherently egotistical act.

Theres a lot of egocentric killing in the name of religion. I dont feel like getting into a huge debate but you seem smart and with just a little reflection itll become self evident.

Tho I tend to view most things the humans do as inherently self-serving. Its a fundamental aspect of life.
Well would you still provide an example? I hope this is not the case where somebody claims that everything - even altruism - is egoistic, because that's how you do what you want to do. That's an useless reductionism that is really inefficient, although it's problably not what you're saying.

I was expecting people to say that killing somebody for an idea is somehow better than killing somebody for a financial gain... Uh.

Does it mean that people that went to crusades with the sole reason of plundering some goods were somehow better than people who went there really believing they are fightning for the Holy Land?

[iamgine]

What in your opinion is worse - a murder commited due to religious beliefs or a murder commited for economic gains? Which one is more moral? Would you be more pissed if some religious fanatic killed your relative because his beliefs told so, or if a robber shot your relative to pick his pockets?

I wonder.
The circumstance makes most of the emotion though, not the cause.

For example, if the robber had asked for money but your relative was stupid enough to try to fight him then I'd not be as pissed as if the relative already gave money but still killed anyway. Another example, if the religious killer just shoot my relative dead, then it's not as bad as if he tortured them first.

The point is not the cause but how much suffering did my relative experience.

[kNIOKAS]

The circumstance makes most of the emotion though, not the cause.

For example, if the robber had asked for money but your relative was stupid enough to try to fight him then I'd not be as pissed as if the relative already gave money but still killed anyway. Another example, if the religious killer just shoot my relative dead, then it's not as bad as if he tortured them first.

The point is not the cause but how much suffering did my relative experience.
OK so say somebody electrocuted your relative in order to take his cute dog vs somebody electrocuted your relative because he was offending their religion by saying things.

The suffering of a victim is an ok marker to jugde the situation, I would agree.

[iamgine]

OK so say somebody electrocuted your relative in order to take his cute dog vs somebody electrocuted your relative because he was offending their religion by saying things.

The suffering of a victim is an ok marker to jugde the situation, I would agree.
In that case I would be more pissed at the one taking the dog. It seems he had no provocation and really no cause to kill. Meanwhile the religious one, even though the cause was equally petty to me, I understand to that person it was very important while I can't say the same about the one taking the cute dog. Maybe I just haven't seen how cute it is.

[Dresta]

one is confused, misguided, brainwashed, etc...the other is greedy, evil, unloving, etc
No they aren't. I could switch all those distinguishing factors and the assertion be no less accurate.




Ok that's right. Where I'm going is that murdering for money is egoistical and an attempt to profit off of somebody's life, while murdering for religion is not aimed at getting material goods, and not as egoistic.

:hammerhead:

Seriously, what a childish distinction. I think you'll find, actually, that they're both extremely 'egoistic' - though it is pointless to talk about egoism in such a way regardless, considering human beings aren't capable of doing something that isn't in their interest, because all thought is centered around the self, and is only intelligible in respect to the self.

Basically, thinking that only wanting material goods is the definition of egoism is downright idiotic. As if having children were selfless!

:rolleyes:

[kNIOKAS]

No they aren't. I could switch all those distinguishing factors and the assertion be no less accurate.



:hammerhead:

Seriously, what a childish distinction. I think you'll find, actually, that they're both extremely 'egoistic' - though it is pointless to talk about egoism in such a way regardless, considering human beings aren't capable of doing something that isn't in their interest, because all thought is centered around the self, and is only intelligible in respect to the self.

Basically, thinking that only wanting material goods is the definition of egoism is downright idiotic. As if having children were selfless!

:rolleyes:
Thanks for not contributing to the thread. :sleeping

[L.Kizzle]

People ranking murders now ...

[Akrazotile]

People ranking murders now ...


Today I learned some murders are alpha, others murders are weak and beta. FACT.

[L.Kizzle]

Today I learned some murders are alpha, others murders are weak and beta. FACT.
Did you learn this personally or you read something?

PS: Don't incriminate yourself.

[Dresta]

Thanks for not contributing to the thread. :sleeping
I did contribute to the thread actually, by correcting your completely illogical and inane line of thought. Try reading it again: it completely refutes everything you've said in this thread.

[kNIOKAS]

People ranking murders now ...
Isn't that a typical ISH thing to do? If you can rank fast food chains then you should be able to take on moral dilemmas, as well.


I did contribute to the thread actually, by correcting your completely illogical and inane line of thought. Try reading it again: it completely refutes everything you've said in this thread.
Stop half-assing your annoying act. Just get out. :rolleyes:

[Dresta]

You're the one that asked such a pointless question and then gave such an idiotic response to it. There's no need to get all huffy and moist about it. I know you're incapable of understanding anything or making any sense whatsoever, but it's ok, you can get some help - i hear there's plenty of programs for people like you nowadays. So it's not all bad.