Murder can't be justified, any more than hate can be. One wrong doesn't equal another wrong. There's either reverence for all life, or there truly isn't respect for any life. No person has the right to decide who shall live, who shall die, who is worthy of life, who is worthy of death. We're all sinners to one extreme or the other. It's only through God's grace and love that He forgives us. If more people held God in their souls, this world wouldn't be the mess that it is right now. Only God should play God.
"A murderer is only an extroverted suicide"
Murder is wrong. Period.
Murder and vengeance are two completely different things. Not saying vengeance is a good thing, but it is not the same as murder.<br />
Scenario. A man grabs your child out of your backyard, takes her somewhere, rapes and tortures her for a couple of days and then kills her, just for fun. That is murder. <br />
You go through all the pain of loss, and watch the investigation and see him arrested and tried and he get off on a technicality. You go after him and shoot him in the head. That is vengeance. <br />
Would you have killed him if he had never taken your child? Would you have killed him, if the justice system had done its job? <br />
Do you see the difference?
Of course it isn't right, and both people had their own reasons for committing the crime, but the second crime would never happen if the first hadn't happened. Did I say vengeance was right? No, but still vengeance is only murder in the legal definition. And I understand the need for a law that prevents us from killing anyone who killed someone we cared for. That would be a never ending chain of killings. So, yes it is wrong and must not be allowed, but one is understandable, while the other is despicable.
Playing god? Nah. Murder is just wrong. People are just picky on who they decide to kill.
I don't think I could kill anyone... Ever.
Yes, so what in saying is... In my eyes it's never ok to kill.
For me, no. Never.
um, it tends to be, but murder isn't always wrong, i wouldn't try to argue that
hard to say - the answer requires such broad and deep clarifications, and says so much about the speaker, that it's very hard for that vital discussion to complete a successful journey
i can only think of dry, abstract generalisations, but that stuff usually happens on the ground in the heat of the moment, instantly or from a moment obsessed upon
by various examples presumably?