SPORK: About 'peace' people being supporters of SH.
Sat, 22 Mar 2003 23:35:39 -0800
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of JS
> On Sat, 22 Mar 2003, johnhall wrote:
> > Yes, it might be OK not to stop the woman from being raped.
> under what circumstances would that be OK?
In the context of the discussion, which you clipped out, that question
is more appropriately addressed to Mr. Bone.
In the context of Iraq, the answer might be 'because the effort would be
futile and would also get your entire family killed'.
Mr. Bone was making the point that non-intervention did not make one
morally liable. I heavily sympathize with the point in the abstract.
Such a person isn't morally liable, _for the crime_. In concrete
personal terms I'd consider non-intervention to be an act of moral
cowardice at the very least.
In other words, the cost of intervention, the likelihood of success, and
the risk of bad side effects should be considered in addition to the
moral good of stopping the atrocity.