![Cultish delusions [1213x1351 - 182KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/qHDfBL.jpg){kind=link}
But would say, no no, rape is much better than murder. Because non-existence is an evil. But rape is just a pain, and living longer gives you more chance to convert to Catholicism.
So, were someone to fall into an industrial grinder and be dead in 5 seconds unless you turn it off by the switch, but an oracle tells you they will die in 15 minutes in excruciating pain if you turn off the switch, would advocate pressing the switch, because that's more time for them to convert to Catholicism.
Don't put words in my mouth. I have elsewhere, and recently, defended the death penalty to you. So what makes you think I would always prioritize someone living longer?
I would never defend rape because it is always moral evil.
Death (contrary to murder) is a natural evil, but not necessarily a moral evil. Murder is a moral evil. Death is only necessarily a natural evil. So the death penalty is overall a good, because it is a restoration of the right order of justice; the natural evil of the punishment / death is attached to this good accidentally. Such a death is not a moral evil, and thus it is justified by the good of the justice being directed towards God.
So would you press the switch or not?
I would press the switch to stop the grinder. Setting aside the fact that 5 seconds is scarcely enough time to discern whether such an oracle is legitimate, it is not for me to decide how and when someone will die, but God. If someone is in danger, and I can save them, I save them, simple as that. Even if they are suicidal.
This is no different from the euthanasia issue, which the Church clearly teaches is immoral. If someone is in pain and wants to die, giving them a needle is formal cooperation in suicide. The issue is more nuanced if the person is only alive by virtue of machines - I don't think the Church teaches there is a moral obligation to force someone to continue living, if they would die by natural means if left alone. And that makes sense to me. It is similar to the contraceptive issue; sex with an infertile wife is fine, and natural family planning is fine (if exercised in the right spirit), but contraception is wrong because it obstructs the natural end of the act. Likewise, enabling a natural death is fine, especially if all reasonable means to correct the issue have been taken, but actively causing the death is immoral.
I don't think I wrongfully put words in your mouth then. Regarding whether you would press the switch or not. I think and I have different intuitions here, that go along with utilitarianism, or negative utilitarianism. And I also think that a poll would reveal that most people would wish that you not press the switch.
If you were accusing me of wrongfully putting words in your mouth regarding the rape thing, but not the grinder thing... I wasn't saying you were saying that rape is moral. (Although I was jokingly saying you were saying that immoral means to paying rent was the way to go.) I was saying that rape, while still a grave sin, is less grave than murder.
I don't think I was wrong about your positions here. I don't think I represented you inaccurately.
(post is archived)