Quote:
|
Originally Posted by frogza
I can understand the draw of being a pacifist. It sounds good when your sitting comfortably in a "safe" world.
|
No doubt, it's easier to exercise in a relatively safe situation.
It also sounds good when you are by nature a nonviolent person.
Quote:
|
What I don't understand is deciding, that when confronted with the choice between letting an innocent person be killed or stopping the attacker why a person would choose to simply allow the "good" person to die. To me, it looks like a coward trying to cover his cowardice with a pretty picture.
|
That's arguing from a single extreme case as if it were representative.
Pacifism is about not using violence in various possible scenarios. Defense of another is only one of these. Aggression and self-defense are the others.
I do wonder why you think violence is the only possible way to come to the aid of another. I can think of several.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Necrosis
Because pacifists want someone else to risk injury protecting them.
|
Not necessarily. I want there not be in any kind of physical confrontation so that nobody has to risk injury.
But assuming this is true, why is it a bad thing?
Quote:
|
There must be a great many chivalrous individuals where you live.
|
Probably, we live less than an hour from a military base. I do know my wife would be willing to kill or die to protect me from physical harm if it came to that.