21 May '07 21:53>
The biblical literalist is stuck defending the rash actions of the OT God, who on several occasions ordered his chosen people to commit genocide, and on other occasions directly carried it out by his own hand. This begs the question: Is it consistent for a "just, loving and merciful" God to order thousands of people, some of whom are innocent children, to be killed?
The usual defense is that God may have a good reason, but we are either not entitled to ask, or not capable of understanding what it is. I reject the latter; I believe that, even if it is difficult to understand, we are beings capable of moral deliberation, and ought to be given the chance to try.
If genocide can ever be a morally acceptable act, then it should not be too hard for us to imagine a situation in which it is morally correct. I have asked biblical-literalist Christians to give me a hypothetical situation in which genocide is justified; so far, no takers.
Disappointed by the lack of response, I put myself back in my old theistic shell and tried to imagine how I might respond to such a challenge. Here goes:
The race of the Xites all have a terminal disease, borne by a rodent that is indigenous to their country. However, they have started trade with other civilizations, and other peoples who come in contact with Xites are dying horrible, twitching deaths (lacking the natural immunity that the Xites have. Furthermore, the immunity is genetic, so no vaccine can be formulated to help the other races). The Xites are unmoved, however, and assert their right to continue to mingle with other civilizations. They resist attempts at quarantines.
In that case, the genocide of all Xites may be justified to keep all the other civilizations safe, especially if the population of other civilizations is far greater than that of the Xites.
The usual defense is that God may have a good reason, but we are either not entitled to ask, or not capable of understanding what it is. I reject the latter; I believe that, even if it is difficult to understand, we are beings capable of moral deliberation, and ought to be given the chance to try.
If genocide can ever be a morally acceptable act, then it should not be too hard for us to imagine a situation in which it is morally correct. I have asked biblical-literalist Christians to give me a hypothetical situation in which genocide is justified; so far, no takers.
Disappointed by the lack of response, I put myself back in my old theistic shell and tried to imagine how I might respond to such a challenge. Here goes:
The race of the Xites all have a terminal disease, borne by a rodent that is indigenous to their country. However, they have started trade with other civilizations, and other peoples who come in contact with Xites are dying horrible, twitching deaths (lacking the natural immunity that the Xites have. Furthermore, the immunity is genetic, so no vaccine can be formulated to help the other races). The Xites are unmoved, however, and assert their right to continue to mingle with other civilizations. They resist attempts at quarantines.
In that case, the genocide of all Xites may be justified to keep all the other civilizations safe, especially if the population of other civilizations is far greater than that of the Xites.