Uh, no. I get your point, but it needs a LOT of work. Suppose terrorists are holding your mother and your father. They threaten to torture and kill them unless you kill their enemy, Mr. X. The END (saving the lives of two people) does justify killing, say, the Terrorists, but does that same END justify killing Mr. X?
See my article http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2007/tle449-20071230-04.html --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "miss.reason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Of all the irrational cliches out there, the one that irritates me, a > Libertarian, the most is "The end doesn't justify the means." The truth > is that only an END can justify a MEANS. MEANS are neither good nor > evil. What determines their goodness or badness is the END RESULT of the > MEANS. If the END RESULT of a MEANS is good, then that MEANS is good. > > For example, killing a human being (MEANS) is neither good nor evil. If > your END in killing a human being is to defend your own life (or that of > others), then that MEANS is good. If your END in killing a human being > is to seize their property, that makes the MEANS evil. > > Please add your comments on this subject to my blog at > http://www.MissReason.blogspot.com <http://www.missreason.blogspot.com/> > . >
