If nature is balance, and subjection to excesses or deliberate deprivations are considered to be evil
Then what is the most ethical way for a state to kill someone without either depriving them of something or subjecting them to something in excess?
Killing must qualify as that in itself, but what if we must for ... 'reasons', then what:
The chair? excessive amounts of electricity
The rope? Deprivation of blood to the organs
Firing Squad? same
Drowning? Deprivation of oxygen
it seems there is no way to end someones life without committing an evil
but we naturally get thirsty and hungry and surely must eat
so we must deprive some other living thing in order to sustain ourselves
maybe if we can convince ourselves that plants and animals arent the same as a human because ... 'reasons'?
sentience, maybe? but they are..
so is the desire of living itself, by necessity, what we might otherwise categorize as evil?
..is nature jewish?
im scared bros
what makes one okay and not the other?
what makes a state worthier than a man to arbitrate and carry it out?
i feel tricked