- The percept against killing
The world today is plagued by various kinds of conflicts: ethnic, racial, religiousand ideological. Terrorism appears to reign supreme in many countries. War is notjust a threat, it is a continuing actuality all over the globe.
The use of nuclearpower in war is a worldwide anxiety. The manufactureof firearms is a thrivingindustry. Are there wars because there are firearms, or are there firearms becausethere are wars? The two seem to form a vicious circle, and it may be questionedwhether conflicts are maneuvered and nurtured in order to find a ready market forthe flourishing arms industry.
Enough nuclear power is available today to blow the planet up several timesover. Chemical and biological weapons capable of inflicting unimaginabletorment have been designed to kill people but leave buildings intact.But it is wellto remember that cruelty dehumanizes the victim overtly, and the perpetrators inmore subtle ways.
The question arises whether life is deemed more, or less,valuable today when man is at the apex of his
technological prowess, than inearlier periods of his history.If a world war erupts there will be no victor
to enjoy victory, as the victor,victim, and the uninvolved will all be annihilated. Some realization of this
imminent catastrophe seems to have dawned on the nuclear powers at long last,hence the recent negotiations for arms control. But it is a timely question to askhow valuable one individual holds the life of another to be.
When we pay attention to the precarious situation man faces today, we beginto appreciate and marvel at the real value and significance of the precept againstkilling. If only the scientific community of the proud modern world had observedthis simple moral precept of the inviolability and sanctity of life, it might haveconcentrated only on the constructive uses of science.
But what is paradoxical andeven ludicrous today is that modern man is foolhardy enough to pride himself onunprecedented scientific achievement when in fact he has brought the entirehuman species to the very brink of disaster.Militarism is not the only ill effect of the lack of sympathy for life. It is felt toa very marked degree in agriculture. The free use of insecticides, weedicides, andchemical fertilizers has caused soil pollution with disastrous long-termconsequences.
The natural chemical and bacterial balance of the soil has beendisturbed. As a result the fertility and the productivity of the soil are diminishingat an alarming rate. Rivers and seas too have been polluted by chemical waste andin some areas rivers have become incapable of sustaining aquatic life. All thesehave adversely affected human life, and unless man turns over a new leaf with aradical change in attitude this dangerous trend portends disaster.
A return to moralvalues seems a survival imperative.Another disgraceful inhuman activity we hear of sometimes is the prevalenceof baby farms in the Third World countries, where it is alleged that unwantedbabies are sold to human tissue banks to provide organs and tissues for transplantpurposes. One shudders, overcome with revulsion at this callous and shamefuldisregard for the life of another.Money, status, and power seem to be the criteria which determine the value ofone person’s life as against that of another.
Can civilized man, with a clearconscience, use the life of one individual to save the life of another? This showsthe extent to which modern man has been dehumanized. Moral discipline is acrying need to impress upon him the inherent worth and dignity of all humanity
