Evil for greater good?

Andrew Rilstone doesn't seem to visit here anymore, sadly.
But look at one of his recent blogs, beautifully written and on topic for
the tread Perceiving evil.
http://andrewrilstone.blogspot.com/2008/02/fear-of-fire.html

Blessings,
Ann

On Feb 20, 6:17 pm, "AJA" <ahnem... RemoveThis @optonline.net> wrote:
> Andrew Rilstone doesn't seem to visit here anymore, sadly.
> But look at one of his recent blogs, beautifully written and on topic for
> the tread Perceiving evil.http://andrewrilstone.blogspot.com/2008/02/fear-of-fire.html
>
> Blessings,
> Ann

Well, yes, Andrew does address some of the issues, and Lewis many of
them, in regard to punishment and justice, and our duties concerning
how we are to deal with those who have done wrong. The part of the
situation that often is neglected (that Mr. Rilstone does touch on
briefly by implication) concerns our duty to the innocent and to
potential future victims. What are our responsibilities to those who
have done no wrong? Perhaps a stalker hasn't hurt anyone, YET, but if
his actions indicate he is bound to do so, what ought we to do? It is
all well and good to protect the rights of terrorists, but is there
not a point when the harm they can do exceeds the moral benefit of
normally applied restraint? Ayn Rand would say that the decision by
such a person that people's lives have no value negates their own
right to life. I don't personally think things like torture have much
benefit in any case, but I don't know everything, there might be times
when inflicting pain or psycological pressure is necessary to protect
those who, after all, did nothing at all to justify what they would
face.

Daryl