Modulous writes:
In direct response to your post, I agree - it is the lesser of two evils - but when the decision is yours to make the morally right choice is to pick the lesser of two evils, yes? It is of course incredibly rare that 'rape' happens to be the lesser of two (or more) evils.
Yes.
I just thought that's what Perdition said, then you questioned him when he still called it "wrong". I think all 3 of us are talking about the same thing, and agree, we're just getting confused between the local use of right/wrong (rape vs. holocaust) and the overall use of right/wrong (the action of raping).
Personally, I would describe it as a morally good
decision that results in consciously choosing to do a morally bad
action.
It is an important step in morality, when we start to understand that decisions and actions are seperate. I think your morality is far beyond this step, but my clarification is more for on-lookers then a correction to your personal self.
Sort of like first-aid. If you have two cut fingers, but only one bandage, you bandage the worst-cut. That doesn't make it good to have an open wound.. it's just the best decision from the limited situation.
It is important to remember that an open wound is still bad for all situations (including this one), just as it is important to remember that rape is still wrong for all situations (including this one). It's just the limitations of the situation that prevents us from attending all wounds, or avoiding all wrongs.
™ Version 4.2
