Yes, it is right. No, it is wrong

There was a good enjoyable discussion in the post below called “New Years Resolutions?” when BB-Idaho, being his usually impish self, added to the discussion that question of the Great American Think Off. The question being “ Is it ever right to do the wrong thing”? When you first read this question the first thing that comes to mind is that you wonder on which side of the creek the guy who thought this question up was born on.

The first problem that needs to be addressed is the idea of the meaning of right or wrong. We use those words so often when other words would be more accurate and clearer. We use the words in terms of morality, whether or not something is sinful. We use it terms of truthfulness, whether or not something said is true. We use it in many other instances also and any reader would be able to come up with their own.

For this discussion of the question, the meaning of it will be strictly in terms of morality and truth. I will use both because it seems to me that you can’t have one without the other. Moreover, it will address another issue at the same time, whether or not truth and morality is relative or absolute.

Experts of morality would say that thinking impure thoughts are acts of sinfulness but in my mind to have never even thought of an act of impurity would be impossibility. However, there would be many that would say that impure thoughts are the best of thoughts but only as long as they remain just thoughts.

War, though, is the best example we can use to examine whether or not there are times when doing the wrong thing is right. Pacifists will say that war is always wrong. Then you have those who will say that war should only be a last resort when diplomacy can no longer be the way to go. Then, of course, there are those who would go to war at the drop of the hat.

Is war ever justified or is it the greatest sin men can commit against each other? Jihadists seem to think waging war is an act favored by God. In the Old Testament, we read that God even chooses sides in a war. Then, of course we have the Crusades of the Middle Ages. While I would not argue with God himself, if He was to tell me that wars can be righteous at times, I’d still be hard pressed to say that wars can be just or righteous from these examples.

There are those that would come out and say wars are righteous if fought in self-defense. However, even this creates a dilemma because a war fought out of self-defense is also a war that is fought by the other side who attacked without a justifiable reason. Can just one side of a war declare the war itself as a justified war? How can any act be declared as justified or righteous unless all participants of that act are acting righteously?

We just fought two wars against different nations, nations that we attacked. Some would say we were justified in one but not the other. Both nations fought back in self-defense. So, from this it can be said that even a war fought in self-defense does not necessarily make a war righteous. So, what is it that we can use to declare wars can be declared as a righteous act?

We can add another element to this equation by remembering that we have recently declared a new concept of human rights. Rights that we consider as being of an universal nature and that no one should violate. You can’t have a war without both sides being declared as violating those rights. Even the idea of a proportional response to attacks would be in violation of these rights. There will always be the cry of innocent civilians being killed from both sides.

Yet, wars can be said as being the one constant throughout the age of mankind. Has there ever been a time when the lion laid peacefully along side of the lamb? I’ll have to admit that I do not have the answer. I will say though that it is my belief that war is one act where the answer to the question is yes but don’t ask if I can justify that answer because within myself I cannot.

I can only come up with one answer to that. That answer would be, that I fear the consequences that might result from the end results of not going to war. That in itself would demand that any war that we participated in must be a war that we resolve to be the winner of.

I will have to admit also that the question has one benefit. It gives reason for The Griper’s existence. He can gripe about it regardless of the answer. lol