Moral Relativity-Child Suicide Bombers

Ryan Molenaar: Con: The Taliban's use of children as suicide bombers cannot be excused by any moral relativist claim In this argument, the idea of children being used to become and be used as suicide bombers is questioned. While I do not condone such behavior in any way I believe that the Taliban's usage of suicide bombers can indeed be excused if referring to Moral Relativist claims. Moral Relativism will be broken down into three categories in this argument; Descriptive, Meta-Ethical, and Normative. The first couple of statements simply state facts about the Taliban and what they believe. The children used by the Taliban do not have much knowledge of anything religious, and so the Taliban try to teach them a certain way. It is believed by those who are not within the Taliban that the children are being taught wrong. However, when taking into account the idea of Descriptive Relativism, it can be argued that the way they are teaching it cannot be judged by others. Perhaps that is what the Taliban believe when they say that it is okay to commit suicide. It is stated in the video that the "bad" people are those who teach the Quran to the children incorrectly. Firstly, who is to say that what is taught is wrong? The Quran can be interpreted in many ways and the Taliban clearly see it as one way. Secondly, according to Meta-Ethical Relativism, the subjective term of "bad" and all other terms considered subjective, cannot be used to judge a standard that may be set in a certain culture. It is clear that what the Taliban are doing is not right, but when applied to moral relativity, it can be argued that there is no moral wrong. The Taliban are simply doing what they interpret as right, whether others believe it or not, and according to Normative Relativism, that it is morally right and even understandable for one to defend one's moral code when being judged by a so-called universal standard. I conclude that, while I do not support the Taliban's tactics in any way, it can be excused when referring to moral relativist claims as follows: (1.)The Taliban believe it is their duty to protect their homeland by any means necessary. (12:51) (2.)The children used by the Taliban do not have any knowledge that what they are doing is wrong, and so are told that it is okay. (15:32) (3.)The children are not specifically told what will happen when they detonate the bombs. (16:02) (4.)Young children, when learning, are told that in order to go to paradise, that they must commit suicide. (17:02) (5.)Children being trained for suicide bombers did not read much of the Quran to fully understand what was religiously required of them, based on those outside of the Taliban's affiliation. (17:26) (6.)Children are told that those they are targeting have insulted their holy book, the Quran. (18:20) (7.)Knowledge of who they would be targeting was withheld from the children. (19:03) (8.)Children did not know the full meaning of the Quran. (19:12) (9.)Figures of authority have instructed children to commit suicide to go to paradise. (19:50) (10.)Descriptive Moral Relativism states that it would be incorrect to assume that one all powerful moral framework to judge can be applied to any culture. (Rachels.4.3.3) (11.)Taliban teach the Quran how they interpret it. (17:02) (12.)Meta-Ethical Relativism states that subjective terms cannot be applied to the judgment of a standard by a supposed universal standard. (13.)The people who tell the children about the Quran are bad. (19:57) (14.)Normative Relativism states that it is understandable and moral to defend their own moral code, whether it be subjective or not, even in the face of a universal judgment. (15.)The Taliban's usage of child suicide bombers in this video can be excused by moral relativist claims. In conclusion, I argue that the Taliban's usage of children as a means of delivering suicide bombs, while not encourage by me, can be excused when referring to moral relativist claims; Descriptive, Meta-Ethical, and Normative.