posted
I finished reading World War: Z last night and it got me thinking...
From a religious (specifically Catholic) point of view, is killing a Zombie murder?
From what I understand of Catholicism, taking a braindead person off life support is murder. So why would it be ok to kill a zombie? Other than in self defense. I mean, what if you could just keep him caged forever so he could never hurt anyone. Is it still right to kill him?
I realize the Pope has never made any pronouncements on the undead (though maybe he did back in the dark ages?) But what do the jatraquero catholics think?
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
A zombie of the type described in WWZ is by definition the reanimated body of someone who has died. Given that, I think that the Catholic Church (of which I am not a member, I should add) would necessarily treat them differently than they would a braindead person on life support. I'd guess that the church would consider them to be infernal beings, actually.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
As I have always understood the Catholic position on Euthanasia taking a brain dead person off life support is not murder. Poisoning or suffocating them is.
I may be wrong about that.
Killing a Voodoo Zombi would definitely be a killing, but I presume that you are talking about the traditional movie Zombie who is merely a corpse animated by magic or evil spirits. There's nothing to murder there-- the person is already dead.
Reg Shoe, from Discworld, would be a rather different case, I would think, since the animating spirit is the one that lived in the body to begin with.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I also think it would be helpful to know the Catholic Church's stance on killing in self defense. Because since zombies tend to want to either turn everyone else into zombies or eat brains, I would think "killing" them would be considered self defense for sure.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
well, I think it all depends on the flavor of zombification you're talking about. If the person is fully and totally dead before re-animating (i.e. brain, heart, etc etc all cease to function) then presumably you're good. Now if it was more of a virus that cuts off brain function but leaves the rest of the body more or less in-tact with no discrete "death" event, then you might be walking some thin ground.
Shawn of the Dead adds an interesting spin to it <spoilers> even though he's still infected/zombified Ed still seems to retain some portion of his personality (and presumably his soul) so it would seem to back up the moral conservative answer of "yes it's murder to kill a zombie" interesting line of questioning though...
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jim-Me, for clarification, the Catholic Church's stance on life support is roughly summed up as follows(keep in mind it's been about 6 years since I've had this discussion, so recent events may/may-not have updated some of these):
1) Not going to extra-ordinary measures to keep someone alive (i.e. not plugging them into a life-support machine) is acceptable. Basically "ordinary" life-saving measures should be performed (CPR etc) but not the "extra-ordinary" ones, which is somewhat of a grey area.
2) if someone is already hooked up to life-support it is NOT ok to take them off and let them die.
basically actively doing anything that will result in their death is bad, refraining from excessive action is ok.
as for self defense I recall it more or less matching common law. i.e. it's still not good to kill someone, but if the only option in order to save your own life and/or the lives of others is to kill the aggressor it may be acceptable (but if you look straight at the catechism you're going to get a much clearer answer than I'm giving)
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Under option 2 in Matt P's link, I think it depends on if it is an evil spirit inhabiting the body. Then it is not only justifiable, but incumbent to administer an RPG.
Can I just say I love Duncan Idaho, anyway?
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think taking even a live-brained person off life support is murder, because under church doctrine it is not necessary to use "heroic measures" to prolong life. "Heroic measures" don't include food and water, but do include breathing machines.
But killing a zombie isn't a life support issue. Is he brain-dead? Maybe not. If his brain weren't working, he couldn't walk up and bite you.
Anyway, zombies are decomposing even while they storm your house trying to eat you, so if self-defense weren't an issue, you could just wait. But of course it's an issue. Whoever heard of a zombie that wasn't trying to eat you?
Posts: 544 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:As I have always understood the Catholic position on Euthanasia taking a brain dead person off life support is not murder. Poisoning or suffocating them is.
That is my understanding as well. Much of the confusion stems from widespread misunderstanding of what brain dead means.
quote:well, I think it all depends on the flavor of zombification you're talking about. If the person is fully and totally dead before re-animating (i.e. brain, heart, etc etc all cease to function) then presumably you're good. Now if it was more of a virus that cuts off brain function but leaves the rest of the body more or less in-tact with no discrete "death" event, then you might be walking some thin ground.
Yep. Self-defense (more accurately, actions aimed at preserving innocent life from unjust aggressors which have the effect, but not the intent, of killing the aggressor) is allowed. Absent self-defense, I'd say destroying reanimated bodies is OK but not killing virus-infected zombies. Of course, in cases of doubt, one should err on the side of not destroying the zombie.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Not going to extra-ordinary measures to keep someone alive (i.e. not plugging them into a life-support machine) is acceptable. Basically "ordinary" life-saving measures should be performed (CPR etc) but not the "extra-ordinary" ones, which is somewhat of a grey area.
Whether treatment is ordinary or extraordinary cannot be determined based on solely on the treatment - the medical condition must also be considered. There are two prongs to determining whether a treatment is extraordinary: reasonable hope of benefit and excessive burden. Each is evaluated in the context of the condition and of each other. From my earlier link:
quote:A therapy to prolong life may not be judged to be ordinary or extraordinary until the actual medical condition of the patient is considered. Hence a respirator or even an organ transplant is not in itself an extraordinary means to prolong life. The decision concerning the ethical obligation to either use or forgo a form of life support depends on the benefit or burden it will offer a particular patient.
posted
How come I can hear Samuel Jackson saying in his next movie, "I'm not killing these $#$@# @#$#@$@#$@# zombies. I'm just exorcising the #@$@#$@# spirits out of these corpses with extreme @#$@#$@#$#@@#$@# force."
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church (see 2278)
Euthanasia
2276 Those whose lives are diminished or weakened deserve special respect. Sick or handicapped persons should be helped to lead lives as normal as possible.
2277 Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable.
Thus an act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect due to the living God, his Creator. The error of judgment into which one can fall in good faith does not change the nature of this murderous act, which must always be forbidden and excluded.
2278 Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of "over-zealous" treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one's inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected.
2279 Even if death is thought imminent, the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted. The use of painkillers to alleviate the sufferings of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not willed as either an end or a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable Palliative care is a special form of disinterested charity. As such it should be encouraged.
_________________
As you can see, the Catholic Church definitely allows for the removal of life support in certain situations.
Posts: 6 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
From my Catholic perspective, is killing a zombie murder?
That depends on one question--does it have the a soul or not?
If it has a soul it was given at conception, then a zombie must be treated as any other living person. The only justifiable reason for killing a zombie with a soul would be in self-defense.
If a zombie does not have the soul God breathed into at conception, then killing it would not have the same ramifications as killing a human being. Without the soul God gave it, a zombie ceases to be a human being.
For instance, a person dies and his soul goes to heaven. Through some voodoo his body is raised from the dead, but his soul remains in heaven. The zombie really isn't alive, because it is not being acted on by its own soul. Some other power, such as magic or demonic power is acting on the body. This would be an abomination, against the natural laws of God. In such a case, breaking this unnatural bond by "killing" the zombie would be proabably be a sanctified act.
Posts: 6 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stormie: From the Catechism of the Catholic Church 2278 Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of "over-zealous" treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one's inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected.
The emphasized portion clearly shows the patient needn't be brain dead, either.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sometimes, killing a zombie is just cruel. And other times, bringing the formerly living back out of retirement seems to be the far more cruel thing to have done.
posted
...that minus strip is one of the weirdest comics I've ever read. I can't make heads or tails of it... I don't think I like it..
Posts: 3295 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't have particular text to draw on here, but I tend to think Catholicism doesn't put a lot of stock in self-defense... I think in many cases it would be considered preferable to allow oneself to die rather than allow the killer to die, given the possibility of forgiveness of sins while the killer still lived.
As far as a zombie goes, though, since allowing the zombie to kill you means that a) the zombie will continue to kill and create more zombies and b) you will most likely return as a zombie yourself and do the same, it would be preferable to destroy the zombie; the zombie is, to the best of all available knowledge, incapable of seeking forgiveness or changing to a less-aggressive path.
That's recollections from upbringing though, as I say, not doctrine.
Though I read WWZ, I don't remember much in terms of specifics about the biology of the undead. Zombie-ism is considered a disease, but the afflicted do appear not to rely on any of what we would normally consider vital signs: they don't need air, they continue to function if they're cut in half, their blood circulation ceases to have a meaningful effect on their "life". Whether they can still be considered "alive" post-coma phase isn't a question I remember being succinctly answered. Based on the above, I wouldn't think they'd be considered alive, but I really don't know.
A formal declaration that the zombies were dead from on high would probably free Catholics to do, well, whatever.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Zombies are already dead, so it's not murder. There was a level in Half-life 2 where you go through a cemetery with a priest, killing zombies.
Posts: 1287 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
It makes me think of I AM LEGEND and how at the uh * Spoiler *
second ending he realises that they were in fact just desieased poeple, not monsters.
Also, on a stricktly zombie related note, yes it would be a sin. Unless portecting yourself. But i think after the pope is eaten there would be an annoucment about zombies....but by then.. it's already to late.
Posts: 549 | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmer's Glue: Zombies are already dead, so it's not murder. There was a level in Half-life 2 where you go through a cemetery with a priest, killing zombies.
Yeah, but wasn't the priest Russian? They're a little more liberal then the typical Catholic priest...
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hopefully no one else saw the execrable film Doomsday. My husband blames me for picking it, but he was the one who asked if there was any zombie movies. I thought it would be a zombie movie because it involved a horrible epidemic and human contact with the survivors. But it turned out they were just people whose social order had broken down, which will naturally result in piercing, tatoos, and cannibalism.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmm, I have to stop reading threads like this. My wife thinks I'm strange because I keep telling visitors that one of the plus points of our new house is that it would be easy to defend in the case of zombie attack.
You just gotta think ahead I always say...
Posts: 892 | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:But it turned out they were just people whose social order had broken down, which will naturally result in piercing, tatoos, and cannibalism.
This is what happens when you let Republicans make movies.
Except the other part of the survivors had reverted to a feudal system. The only thing this movie has to recommend itself is if you want to see Dr. Bashir blow his own brains out. I always kind of liked Dr. Bashir, personally, so that was not a plus.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by pooka: Hopefully no one else saw the execrable film Doomsday. My husband blames me for picking it, but he was the one who asked if there was any zombie movies. I thought it would be a zombie movie because it involved a horrible epidemic and human contact with the survivors. But it turned out they were just people whose social order had broken down, which will naturally result in piercing, tatoos, and cannibalism.
I saw it. My hubby insisted. I didn't WANT to see it despite the fact it was an end of the world movie with Kate Beckinsale (yum) because I think movies where society breaks down and people instantly become 80s punk rockers are really really stupid.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: No first floor windows?
Built into a steep hill with heavy wooden shutters on the only two accessable windows. Also the satircase to the upper floor is wooden and can be taken down if necessary.
This always assumes Zombies can't jump, which is a point of discussion in these here parts. I am firmly in the No to Jumping Zombies camp, my wife is uncertain...
Posts: 892 | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
It was actual Rona Mitra, whose name was familiar to me, but it turned out to be from "A kid in Aladdin's palace".
And of course Zombies jump. They wouldn't be as scary if they couldn't. Fortunately, they don't know where they are jumping to.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My dream home... The one with the big wall around it... It works equally well for End of the World, Fall of Society and Zombie Invasion scenarios.
And of course, when the zombies come crowding up against the wall... I'll have a lawn mower blade on a big pole that I can wind up like a watch.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
guess it all depends on whether you think the person's soul has moved on, or is still with the body of the person who is now a zombie.
Posts: 813 | Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
