Scenerio: one man's death infflicted at your hands (you are not forced) could save humanity. Morally licit?Why

Question

Just wanting to view people opinions. Im expecting alot of "yes.greater good" please try to justify it furthur than that if you can.

Best answer will not be some trite answer.

I want a well detailed thought. Best answer will be based on a good sound argument. I will not base best answer on personal belief. Good luck.

Answer 1

Yes, if the person is a terrorist, or simply a madman with a gun or a bomb, etc.

But no, if the person is someone like Hitler BEFORE Hitler began his campaigns. It is one thing to speak like Ahmajinidad about killing all the Jews; it is another to attempt it. We still allow free speech.

BTW: "the greater good" is the justification used by collectivists (and Hitlerites) to justify their evil. That is very different from "the common defense" that the U.S. Constitution speaks of, because the Constitution does not allow for ends justifying the means; whereas "the common good" means EXACTLY the ends justify the means.

Answer 2

Look to Jesus !

He did the will of God!

Therefor it is Morally licit.

Answer 3

I do not justify it at all, let alone try to justify it further here.

One is responisble only for one's own deeds. You did not bring about the condition mankind finds iself in, but you would certainly be directly responsible for the death of that one man.

What I would do? Bring the situation to the attention of that man, and ask him whether he would be willing to sacrifice himself for humanity. If the answer is no, the matter is over; if yes,then,THEN, it becomes an ethical question for me whether to kill him. Would I? (I am asking myself now) Yes, with his consent,yes.