Committing suicide for a cause

[TheNoNamedOne]

What do you think about those who are so passionate about a cause that they commit suicide by some means in order to try and further that cause? When others are harmed in the course of their suicide, be it purposely or not, does that change how you view them?

Would you ever view them as brave and worthy of praise for their sacrifice, or do they only deserve condemnation? Does the target make any difference, or is it only the affect that matters?

Would you ever have sympathy for them? Could you ever find aesthetic beauty in it?

If their suicide seems or proves fruitless does that make it any less worthy?

[TheNoNamedOne]

Perhaps it is a complicated issue. I think many do not want to comment because perhaps it brings to light inconsistencies and perceptions based on merely one's culture or selfishness.

How do you view a suicide bomber detonating at an army checkpoint in Israel or Iraq?

[dk]

The phrase "one man's terrorist is another man's revolutionary" always comes to my mind.

I personally don't see the point of suicide IN the act. It just doesn't make sense to me. If you didn't kill yourself you could do even more damage. You'd be more valuable to your cause.

This is basically how I feel about the kamikaze pilots as well. What's the point of being the bomb when you can drop bombs without dying?

I have no sympathy for people who use suicide as a tactic. You're so much more valuable to your cause alive.

[Boost]

What do you think about those who are so passionate about a cause that they commit suicide by some means in order to try and further that cause?

I think it is a waste. All it seems to do is make one less person for that cause. It also prevents them from participating in other events to try and further their cause. While they may think they are showing their passion for the cause, it causes me to think that those supporting that cause are a little on the crazy side.


When others are harmed in the course of their suicide, be it purposely or not, does that change how you view them?
Yes, it causes me to dislike them and/or their cause even more. Even if it were a cause I believed in, I think it is a shameful act.


Would you ever have sympathy for them? Could you ever find aesthetic beauty in it?
Nope, no sympathy for them and there isn't anything beautiful in any way when someone takes their own life.


If their suicide seems or proves fruitless does that make it any less worthy?
I have trouble coming up with a time that suicide wouldn't be fruitless or where suicide for a cause is ever worthwhile.

I am not a big fan of PETA, but as far as I know, at least they try and keep it to peaceful protests and taking off their cloths. I can deal with that. :)

[TheNoNamedOne]

I am not a big fan of PETA, but as far as I know, at least they try and keep it to peaceful protests and taking off their cloths. I can deal with that. :)

Yeah, me, too. How great this world would be if all protests were naked ones!? And if people wanted to commit suicide, still, for their cause, at least they could be considerate to us who want to see naked bodies and do it naked.

But seriously, public nudity may lead to career suicide.

[Boost]

Yeah, me, too. How great this world would be if all protests were naked ones!? And if people wanted to commit suicide, still, for their cause, at least they could be considerate to us who want to see naked bodies and do it naked.

But seriously, public nudity may lead to career suicide.

LoL - Nekkid is good, nekkid bloody body though is bad. Have a bit of a weak stomach, so I would probably pass out. And there should be a screening process of who is getting nekkid...I don't even want to think about Rosie O. Donnel getting nekkid for a cause!

So what is your opinion TP, Suicide for a cause honorable or wasteful of ones abilities to further the cause?

[TheNoNamedOne]

So what is your opinion TP, Suicide for a cause honorable or wasteful of ones abilities to further the cause?

I am disgusted by it and condemn it in the strongest terms available.

The difficult problem is how to be consistent when it is turned on its side as self sacrifice for another -- which some may say is an altruistic value that elevates humanity. Could you ever see it as such?

[dk]

I was wondering the same. What if you give your life so others will live? I personally find that admirable, but where's the line?

[Boost]

The difficult problem is how to be consistent when it is turned on its side as self sacrifice for another -- which some may say is an altruistic value that elevates humanity. Could you ever see it as such?

If it were say a person sacrificing their self so that others may live, take jumping on grenade as an easy example, then I think there is a honorable notion to the deed.

But to commit suicide to protest a war or cruelty to animals I think is bad. They haven't saved anybody, and chances are it will not cause a change. Staying alive to continue protesting however has a higher chance of success.

[Boost]

I was wondering the same. What if you give your life so others will live?

Jinx :)

As the wife would say, pinch and a poke, you owe me a coke.

[TheNoNamedOne]

I was wondering the same. What if you give your life so others will live? I personally find that admirable, but where's the line?

Exactly, dk. A woman in a difficult labor with medical problems could sacrifice her life by letting her baby live when given the choice by a doctor. Her decision is her suicide.

But how is that logically different from a person believing he is making it possible so that his children have a chance to life by sacrificing himself by blowing up those persons he sees as the problem that would cause his children their death?

It kinda does bring it back to your terrorist/freedom fighter analogy.

[Boost]

But how is that logically different from a person believing he is making it possible so that his children have a chance to life by sacrificing himself by blowing up those persons he sees as the problem that would cause his children their death?


There are better ways to protect your children then sacrificing yourself as a suicide bomber. In realty you hurt your children more as you are no longer able to provide care for them.

Perhaps it would be better to move out of the area or country to get them away from the violence. Or join a illegitimate military regiment that is designed to protect what you hold dear. I'm sure there are more ways, but those where a few of the top of my head.

[TheNoNamedOne]

If it were say a person sacrificing their self so that others may live, take jumping on grenade as an easy example, then I think there is a honorable notion to the deed.

Yes, the grenade is a threat thrown by the enemy into the midst of a group. One seeks to limit that threat by sacrificing himself. It is an analogy on a small scale. Let's just stick it under the copy machine and blow it up to see that all the pixels stay properly pixelated.

A war ship is ordered into coastal waters of Japan by the Admiral who threw her there in the midst of the people of a different country who view that as a threat. A kamikaze pilot throws his body at it in the belief that it will keep others protected from its dangers.

Now, why are Kamikaze suicide pilots any worse, or to be judged any worse, when trying to eliminate a dangerous threat to their loved ones, than the soldier who commits suicide by throwing himself on the threatening grenade? Whether the threatening object is human or inanimate is irrelevant -- what is relevant is that IT is the threat.

But to commit suicide to protest a war or cruelty to animals I think is bad. They haven't saved anybody, and chances are it will not cause a change. Staying alive to continue protesting however has a higher chance of success.

Bhuddist monks who committed suicide by setting themselves on fire in Vietnam left a strong impression on the psychs of many Americans when those images were broadcast. If that helped gain momentum to the anti war movement of Vietname and even lessened the war by one day, then their sacrifice did save some lives.

Whoa! As for committing suicide to protest animal cruelty -- I am not sure it has ever been done. There are many more real world situations that we have to choose from here in this discussion.

[TheNoNamedOne]

There are better ways to protect your children then sacrificing yourself as a suicide bomber.

Yes, but humans do not always act rational. It is part of our nature to be irrational. There are better ways to protect one's friends than jumping on a grenade. Perhaps more proactive effort on defensive measures could have prevented that.

In realty you hurt your children more as you are no longer able to provide care for them.

I think that is easy to say from anyone who lives in freedom and not under oppression or tyranny. A rallying cry of our forefathers was "Give me freedom, or give me death," and they never said, "Give me freedom, but I am willing to wait a long time for it because I still have kids I have to provide for."

Men of action as I said, act on concepts that rise above own selfishness for one's own welfare or their family's. And besides, what if the person arranged it so that his children will be fully taken care of and provided for as best as possible with another relative?

Perhaps it would be better to move out of the area or country to get them away from the violence. Or join a illegitimate military regiment that is designed to protect what you hold dear. I'm sure there are more ways, but those where a few of the top of my head.

Perhaps so, but there is no reason to assume all those are viable options.