This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I think basically any sober analysis will conclude that murder is fairly obviously worse than rape. However: I think most people will think that someone being a rapist (without additional information) makes them a worse person than if they were a murderer (again, without additional information).
I think a large part of the reason is that there are a lot of circumstances where murder is morally permissible or even necessary (self defence, military action, the cops shooting a hostage taker, not to mention the shitloads of revenge stories where we cheer when the protagonist murders the antagonist). There are no similar situations where rape is morally permissible (in most people's views). It's really hard to argue that you raped someone in self defence.
I don't think most of the examples you gave of "murder" are actually murder. Murder implies unlawfulness and malice and lack of justification.
Someone who murders someone else in a fit of [justified, but not to the point of murder] rage can still be regarded as less of a bad person than a rapist.
That's manslaughter, not murder. Examples: NJ ("committed in the heat of passion resulting from a reasonable provocation"), PA ("acting under a sudden and intense passion resulting from serious provocation")
That depends entirely on the jurisdiction, and not really germane to what people think the morality of the act is.
Driving a get away car from a robbery gone bad isn't more or less evil if you do it in Chicago versus if you do it in Oslo, despite you being charged with felony murder in one jurisdiction and aiding and abetting a robbery in the other.
You're using murder as if it were interchangeable with the word "homicide" and it just isn't. You're making a category error. Self-defense is not murder, it is justifiable homicide. I understand the point you're trying to make, you're just using the wrong word to make it.
Murder and homicide are the same act under different circumstances. If we're discussing the morality of an action, the jurisdiction in which it takes place is immaterial.
We're not discussing the law.
Rape and consensual sex are also the same act under different circumstances. I don't understand your point.
"What if killing people... but bad" is the same as "what if having sex with people... but bad"
That's why I'm objecting to your inclusion of using the word murder to cover acts that are decidedly not murder.
Homicide is killing someone who doesn't want to get killed. Murder is killing someone who doesn't want to get killed *and who the law doesn't want killed either *.
Rape is fucking someone who doesn't want to be fucked. There is no analogous distinction to murder-homicide because there are no cases where the law let's you rape someone.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link