5 ms·
Interesting to flip it around, though: is the doctor who administers a (legally ordered) lethal injection a monster? Why or why not? Or, who gets to decide y
by steven777400 10y ago
Interesting to flip it around, though: is the doctor who administers a (legally ordered) lethal injection a monster? Why or why not? Or, who gets to decide yes or no?
And where is the line? Is the programmer who writes code for a surveillance drone ( immoral? What about one who writes code for a submarine that may carry ballistic missiles? Or for the missile guidance system itself?
- tptacek 10y agoSince I never said anything about doctors being monsters, I don't accept the premise of the question.
- steven777400 10y agoSorry for being unclear. You said: "Nobody bats an eyelash when doctors refuse to help with executions". So I just wanted to flip it around; if the doctor willingly agrees to assist in an execution, what, if any, implications or judgments does that entail?
- squadAutomatic 10y agoDoes that require clarification? Is this some kind of socratic dissection? Are we going to take this somewhere, after we get the obvious part in writing? When a doctor assists in an execution, they participate in what is a murder, just under some other context. Lift that action up and out of the auspices of state and governance, and you have a murderer, accessory to before or after, or an accomplice to. This isn't a particularly rare occurrence, but someone is there to cut the life short, do harm, and achieve a goal. Justice, revenge, passion, grudges aside. There's a winner and a loser. It could be a misanthrope and henchmen, or it could be a doctor, somehow more distinguished than a common thug. The doctor chooses gets hands dirty for different reasons, there they are all the same. But the doctor gets to walk away from his murder, and commit more, so long as the state and government are not deposed.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]