I know what you're thinking. Of course murder is always wrong. At face value; murder, cheating, lying, stealing all seem terrible. But I don't believe that ethics is clear-cut, and I don't believe in absolutist morality. When you look beneath the surface and take in situational relevance, everything changes.
Lawful vs Unlawful Murder
With murder, I believe the question of 'morality' lies in the motives. The legal definition of murder is to kill someone unlawfully. Soldiers commit murder everyday. But it is 'lawful' killing. Being a soldier is not against the law as soldiers are ordered to kill other soldiers.
But if we strip away the 'legality' and look at the human side of things; to kill another person is murder. Whether you're doing it because you've been ordered or trained to, whether you're doing it to save someone else's life, whether you're doing it because you're a psychopath who enjoys killing; murder is murder.
If someone was coming to kill your loved one, would you not kill for them? I would, without question. When it came down to it, if I had to kill to save my own life or somebody else's, I believe I would do it. (Unless I had a heart attack and collapsed in shock.) That, to me, is not a bad thing. Kant would disagree, but then Kant believed in absolutist morality.
Societal Justice
This is where the question of the death penalty also comes into question. Is killing criminals to show killing is wrong a good or bad thing? Or is it a logical thing? Morality is never clear-cut. Will killing criminals really help to stop others from committing crimes, or will it make no difference because if you're a killer you'll do it anyway? It's like trying to increase the prices of cigarettes to stop people from smoking, or making alcohol illegal.
If people want to drink or smoke they'll find a way. Just because something is 'illegal', doesn't necessarily mean it's right or wrong.
Many argue that abortion is murder. Even if it is, what difference does it make? It's far crueller to force someone to raise a child that they can't care for than it is to calmly let them pass on the option. 'Pro-life' people are really pro-birth. They try use their moral piety to show how just they are, but really they're just being selfish and putting their feelings before practical measures.
What about euthanasia? I think euthanasia should be legal. If someone wishes to die, but doesn't have the physical means to take their own life, why should they be 'forced' to carry on living? Better to be dead and peaceful than alive and miserable. Who is the government to tell them that they can't do that? If someone wants to take their own life that's their choice and decision. If they want help with that, provided it's all safe and secure and they have the option to change their mind whenever, that's their decision.
Moral Relativism
There's really no wrong or right answer with anything. The problem with some religious philosophies is that they try to present an absolutist version of right and wrong. Being gay is wrong; pre-marital sex is wrong, murder is wrong, abortion is wrong, talking badly about your parents is wrong, lying is wrong, adultery is wrong, drinking is wrong, eating pork is wrong, listening to rock music is wrong, smoking is wrong, singing and dancing on the street is wrong, killing spiders is wrong, enjoying life is wrong...
They don't look at the individual situations. There's no 'leeway.' I'm probably going to Hell in every single religion (like most of us) as I've broken pretty much every 'moral law' that most of these so-called Holy books believe in. (Not that I give a shit as I don't believe in Hell.) I think it's dangerous to say something is always wrong, because it can lead to dangerous fanaticism and leaves no option for changing one's mind if the situation prevails.
Anyway, what's your opinion reader?
See also: