Siberian tigers, white rhinos, elephants, you name it.
To save the life of my wife, my children, my grandchildren, anyone in my immediate family, and certainly of myself.
How many people would you kill in self-defense, if need there was?
Is there a limit?
And what if it's your country that has decided you are expendable, and need to be expended, certainly not for its survival, but for the greater good?
Do you remember the shocking words of Gracie Slick?
And if, Scyfy network style, you became a vampire, how many would you kill to feed on their blood?
Before now, men have lived by the blood of multitudes of others without the least real need.
Sometimes they have professed to slaughter for justice.
But the outrage - or perhaps one should say the insult - is so much worse in that case than if they do so for perfectly clear self-interest, don't you think?
Somehow it just seems worse, and even an affront to one's dignity, to be killed for a mistake, a misunderstanding, or a fantasy like justice, does it not?
Or to supposedly advance the history of mankind toward some wholly imaginary, utopian consummation?
Or even for God?
In contrast, straightforward self-interest is always at least a sensible motive for anything at all.
Even when mistaken, the intention is sensible.
Wouldn't you really rather at least not be killed for a stupidity?
No comments:
Post a Comment