DiscussMormonism.com

If you are hiding Jews and a Nazi asked you about it, is lying the moral thing to do?

I discussed this with my parents last week and said I wouldn't have a problem lying to Nazis about hiding Jews. To my parents the dilemma wasn't so easy. I then said that I had no problem with it because the moral about protecting innocent human life is greater than the moral not to lie. My mother said that was a good point. However, as I have read things in the past few days, I begin to wonder: just how far should lying be allowed to go? I fear a slippery slope.

Dawkins mentioned that the Intelligent Design film, Expelled employed "lying for Jesus" to get him to participate originally calling itself Crossroads and implying that the film would balance various points of view. Should one justify "lying for Jesus"? Even if one justifies it, doesn't it backfire since you will no longer be trusted, or does this not matter since you don't really need to deal with atheists like Dawkins very much?

But just how far should lying be allowed to go? If I know a man abuses his wife but his wife refuses to testify, am I justified in lying in order to save her?

If I knew that a religious group was abusing children and I testify and the law finds them not guilty by way of compromised evidence, am I justified in lying in order to protect the children when law enforcement messed up for the trial? Am I justified in kidnapping the children from their homes and lying about who the children are?

Maybe, then, lying to protect human life is a slippery slope. I still think that lying to Nazis about hiding Jews is the right thing to do, but I do have misgivings about lying for Jesus or even lying to law enforcement in order to protect people. I would've course, under no circumstances justify lying in order to get gain (jewels). I would lie online in order to protect my personal property (jewels a.k.a. identity) from criminals.

If I had neighbors who I knew planned to fly a plane into a skyscraper, and I had to lie (ie: make something up) to get the police to go investigate them before they do it, I would probably do that. That's sort of like the lying to save the Jews question. There is certainly a continuum from the "no, I would never lie to achieve that" side to the "hell yes, I would lie to achieve that" side, with no clear line delineating one side from the next.

I guess it's important to develop good principles and then make the best judgment calls you can when the circumstances actually arise.

It's sort of like the yellow light question. If the light turns yellow when you're 150 feet away from the intersection, do you stop? How about when you're 50 feet away? How about when you're 20 feet away? Obviously if we're "far enough" away, it's obvious that most people would stop, and if you're "too close", obviously most people wouldn't stop. There will be some middle range where some will stop and some will speed up instead. And there are times when I make a snap decision not to stop when a light turns yellow, and I realize if I'd been just 10 feet further back I probably would have, or that under other circumstances I might have stopped instead of going through it, even at the same distance and speed. And I'm not sure anyone could articulate a hard and fast rule for yellow-light stopping that would always apply and give a clear and unambiguous, objective, and repeatable decision on whether one should stop or keep going when the light turns yellow. Between the extremes of the continuum, it's a judgment call.

I attempt to be honest, yet, I do lie. I try to make the best decision I can and not hurt any others. I have lied to protect people -- even at my own expense, at times. I felt it was the right thing to do.

There was a situation recently where an individual wished to humiliate someone publically. I was put into a predicament of having to state what I knew about the situation. I did a half truth with some omissions response. I did this so as to protect someone from an individual that was being spiteful.

Would I do it again? Probably.

What good would have come from telling the truth? Well, I could have kept my integrity in check. I could have helped hurt someone that I had no desire to hurt. I could have given fodder to someone attempting to hurt someone else for no reasons whatsoever. I made my decision. I'd do it again.

Is it immoral to lie about an evil dictator in order to overthrow or kill said dictator? What if said Dictator was Adolf Hitler? What if said dictator was Sadam Hussein?

Its enough when you can score enough gold to set up a Foundation that will sustain your family in perpetuity.

asbestosman wrote:Is it immoral to lie about an evil dictator in order to overthrow or kill said dictator? What if said Dictator was Adolf Hitler? What if said dictator was Sadam Hussein?

Ok, how about this. Would you steal money if you knew for sure it was the only way to save your son?

Tarski wrote:Ok, how about this. Would you steal money if you knew for sure it was the only way to save your son?

Isn't that what leftie communists do--at least according to Coggins?

Would I really steal to save my son? Well, it depends. I'd probably be willing to go to jail to save my son, but would I be willing to steal money if doing so means someone else's son won't be saved? What if that money is keeping someone's mother alive? What if that money is keeping someone grandma alive? Sorry, but no easy answers. I don't know what I'd do if it were my son. I'd hope though that I'd have limits to how far I'd go.

asbestosman wrote:Is it immoral to lie about an evil dictator in order to overthrow or kill said dictator? What if said Dictator was Adolf Hitler? What if said dictator was Sadam Hussein?

Were swimming through the Utilitarianism questions of philosophy with this thread.

Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism

Mercury wrote:

asbestosman wrote:Is it immoral to lie about an evil dictator in order to overthrow or kill said dictator? What if said Dictator was Adolf Hitler? What if said dictator was Sadam Hussein?

Were swimming through the Utilitarianism questions of philosophy with this thread.

Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism

There is much in Utilitarianism that I like as far as government goes so long as a bigger view is kept in mind--how much good does it do in the long run and what are the long-term costs? In the short term lying may be beneficial, but in the long term lying might actually be worse (in part by making lying less effective at doing good where it otherwise might. E.g. the Nazis are less likely to be fooled by your lies about not hiding any Jews).

I view lies as being either selfish or not. I don't respect, or think highly, of people that lie to forward their own goals or to hurt others. When lies are done to help others I view this as a completely different sort of case. Yet, it could be that I'm a liar that falls into the second category and so see it as more acceptable?