Rape vs. Murder

Vorpy

Which one is worse?

I think Murder is. While rape has an awful impact on whomever experiences it for the rest of their lives, murder doesn't even give you the chance to live. Rape victims have access to counseling and such that doesn't reverse what happened, but helps that move forward and live normal lives later. A murder victim is just done, and it can't be cured, reversed, or treated in any way. So yeah, murder is worse if one has to pick.

Noimporta

Worse in what sense? Worse for the victim? A less moral action?

Vorpy

Moral action.

Although Worse for the victim is a good point as well, some people would rather be dead than a rape victim, and others would rather be raped than lose their lives.

Nyktos

If even one rape victim in the history of the world has managed to live a happy and fulfilling life despite it, rape is a lesser crime than murder.

Trash_Vortex

It's really best not to rank things like this. They're really two completely different things. They're not two points on the same line. Putting one above the other can also have the side effect of not taking the other as seriously.

Noimporta

Well, that is a weird choice, given that your whole argument is based on the "worse for the victim" angle. Rape could be seen as the less moral action since there is no good way to justify it short of some really implausible scenarios, while murder can be committed in self defense, to save others and for plenty other understandable (if not good) reasons.

Nyktos

Killing can be justified, but the term "murder" generally excludes those cases.

Noimporta

Oh, if we're just looking at that subset, then yeah, murder's probably worse.

Vorpy

Why do some lawyers I know use Murder and Homicide as different things? Do they have legal differences or are they marginally different in the definitions?

Khwarizmi

Homicide means killing a person.  Murder is a specific type of criminal homicide.

Beholderess

This one thinks that murder is worse for the victim, but rape is a worse crime.

Why? Because there can be good reasons for murder (note that I do not mean "justified by law", otherwise it won't be classified as murder. But still understandable), but there aren't any good reason for rape. Rape is harming someone just to get some pleasure out of it - For The Evulz in it's purest form. So if anything, rapist can be likened to and compared against a type of murderer that kills simply for the fun of it. And only if compared to this type of murderer rapist is better.

Khwarizmi

For me, murder and rape are both such devastatingly awful things to inflict on people that I don't see the point in trying to compare them.  They're both horrific, and both way, way over the line of what is not acceptable.

Nyktos

Can you give an example? I can't really think of a situation where killing someone intentionally and not in self-defence would be justified, but then I suppose not everyone has the same moral values I do.

Edit: And yeah, what Khwarizmi said. "Would you rather be raped or murdered?" is a stupid question because I (and I suspect most people) would prefer nearly anything to either. That being said, I'd choose being raped without a second thought, though I imagine someone less afraid of death than me might make the other choice just as quickly.

Beholderess

Say, that someone has wronged you greatly but got away with it in the court

Or generally was an Asshole Victim (note that I do not say it makes murder justified. Only understandable). Or to prevent someone from ruining your life (not self-defence, but situations like blackmail). Again, never claimed that it was justified, but still better than "just for fun of it".

As for "preferences" (if such word is appropriate here), this one would rather be murdered than raped, but not! raped then murdered anyway.

Khwarizmi

I think I would rather be raped than murdered, because at least nobody but me would suffer if I got raped.  It is a pretty dumb question, though, because like Nyktos said, most people would prefer nearly anything to either.

Also, whenever I read the title of this thread, I mentally append the subtitle "The fight of the century!"

AXavierB

I never personally understood the idea that rape is worse than murder. It's emotionally scarring, and I'm not trying to undermine the feelings of rape victims, but I personally would prefer it over being killed. That's just me, though.

Elbeem

@Beholderess: I don't really see those as being solid justifications for murder over rape unless one has already accepted the premise that rape is a worse act.

Someone who sees them as neutral may well choose rape in those cases in an attempt to achieve the same results. I personally don't see "Rape someone to keep them from blackmailing me" as an inherently worse thing than murdering them for the same reason. It's more risky, as it leaves the blackmailer alive to keep trying, but on the other hand it doesn't have the finality of snuffing out their life completely.

Khwarizmi

^ Much as I think you're probably correct, I still had a "what the fuck?  Hell no" reaction to reading that second paragraph.

So I guess rape seems more disturbing to me than murder, regardless of whether or not that's consistent with my stated moral code.  I'd definitely find it much more difficult to sympathise with somebody who raped somebody to prevent them from blackmailing them than somebody who committed murder under the same circumstances.

Noimporta

I personally don't see "Rape someone to keep them from blackmailing me" as an inherently worse thing than murdering them for the same reason.

"Rape someone to keep them from blackmailing me"? What is this, a bad hentai manga?

Khwarizmi

Actually, hang on, wouldn't that have the opposite effect to the desired one, anyway?  I mean, I guess they might regard being raped as too shameful to speak out about, but otherwise you'd just make life considerably worse for yourself if you got convicted.

Longfellow

The "rape and murder are both so bad, why compare them" response seems evasive. Shouldn't you have an answer if you have any consistent moral system? Maybe even "it depends", but you could at least compare, like, a single rape to a genocide? A single murder to a mass rape? Or do all four of these things so blow your moral scale that you're paralyzed for an answer?

I think murders tend to be worse for the public and rapes worse for the victim.

Elbeem

^^^ & ^^ I never claimed that the one was more realistic than the other, and I certainly wasn't advocating one over the other.

I'm simply saying that, all other factors being equal, I don't see how "murder someone to protect myself" is inherently more morally justifiable than "rape someone to protect myself" unless you've already accepted that rape is somehow worse than murder.

Khwarizmi

Mass rape and genocide are both worse than individual acts of rape or murder, to my mind, but I'd have thought that'd be obvious.  But individual acts of rape and murder are difficult to compare because they're both severely wrong, but one is wrong because of the level of trauma it inflicts on a single person, and one is wrong because of the effects it has on multiple people, and because different people will react differently to being raped and to the death of a loved one, it's difficult to say which is worse in a general sense, only that both are very bad.  I'm inclined to agree that murders tend to be worse for the public and rapes worse for the victim.

Beholderess

Someone who sees them as neutral may well choose rape in those cases in
an attempt to achieve the same results. I personally don't see "Rape
someone to keep them from blackmailing me" as an inherently worse thing
than murdering them for the same reason. It's more risky, as it leaves
the blackmailer alive to keep trying, but on the other hand it doesn't
have the finality of snuffing out their life completely.

Murder permanently removes someone from your life, while rape does exactly what? It is (in most cases) pretty useless as a solution.

Longfellow

^^ Yeah, I agree that they're difficult to compare. I guess I just object to the wording. They're hard to compare because it really does depend on the particular people and situation, not because they're both superlative evils.

If even one rape victim in the history of the world has managed to live a
happy and fulfilling life despite it, rape is a lesser crime than
murder.

When I read this I was reminded of Tongpu. He'd probably take the opposite viewpoint: if even one rape victim in the history of the world has suffered, rape is a greater crime than murder. In other words, he prioritizes the avoidance of suffering above all else, whereas you prioritize the achieving of happiness above all else.

Nyktos

Tongpu is the last person I'd go to for reasonable opinions on rape and murder.

Khwarizmi

Oh, c'mon man, that's an ad hominem.  That's a perfectly respectable ethical position, and Tongpu certainly isn't the only person to hold it.

vandro

The position is on itself not unreasonable, the logical extreme of the position is unreasonable, at least by societal standards. That's a matter for another topic, anyhow.

Khwarizmi

If by the logical extreme you mean "wipe out every single human being simultaneously to eliminate suffering", sure, but barring silly scenarios like that that will never actually happen, the elimination of suffering is a worthwhile goal, every bit as worthwhile as the creation of happiness.

If we're talking about unreasonable extremes, I think that saying, "Oh well, at least you can still be happy in the future!" to a rape victim would be pretty horribly insensitive.  Of course, nobody advocated that, because it would be stupid.

Nyktos

@Khwarizmi: Oh, the position itself is reasonable enough; I was just saying that citing the opinions of a sociopath in a debate about morals seems rather silly.

Khwarizmi

Tongpu isn't a sociopath.

But yeah, I get what you mean.