Let s talk about what you think of the act of righteous annihilation ?

My opinion is, it depends. If the offender's criminal act has ended, and has caused the result of the crime, and there is no subsequent harm, then it should be recognized, but not encouraged, because this kind of behavior is not conducive to the stability and trust of the family. In fact, the best way at this time is for the family to persuade the perpetrator to turn himself in.

If the criminal act has not begun or ended, and not reporting to the police may cause serious consequences, then "righteous killing of relatives" is the best way to help the offender, and should be encouraged and promoted.

The so-called righteousness may have been formulated by the ruler only to ensure his rule. For example, the deposition of the hundred schools of thought and the exclusive respect for Confucianism, loyalty, filial piety, courtesy, righteousness, and honesty, why not courtesy, righteousness, honesty, filial piety, and loyalty, to put it bluntly, Confucianism is conducive to rule. The so-called righteous extermination of relatives actually has historical limitations, and at the same time, it is not easy to destroy relatives in ancient times.

Intellectually, I think it's good to kill my relatives in a righteous way, but emotionally speaking, I still can't accept it. Man, it's such a complex creature.

In fact, the matter of righteous killing of relatives has been criticized in ancient times. Someone asked Confucius, "If Shun's father is accused of murder, what should Shun do?"

Confucius said: "He should give up the throne and flee to the ends of the earth with his father behind his back." "Behold, Confucius did not support the righteous act of destroying one's relatives, because Confucius considered filial piety to be more important.

But this idea did not become the real mainstream when Confucius was respected in ancient times, and the righteous killing of relatives became the mainstream consciousness, and it has been passed down, so that until now we have found out that this is a very inhumane practice.

To be honest, a person can't even take care of his real relatives, do you expect him to be good to the "monarch father"? It's just a selfish person who is extremely selfish and has a false reputation and profit, fighting for his official position and prestige in the name of the so-called righteous annihilation of relatives, and in the end he is just a scum of society.

I admit that from the perspective of society and the country, it is the right choice to kill relatives in righteousness, but everyone is also an independent individual, and the original family in which he grew up must have his place. As for what has been beaten and scolded since childhood, I'm sorry, if it's not called righteousness, then it's called normal reporting, and there is no personal affection at all, how to highlight righteousness?

I can only say that those who kill their relatives in righteousness may not end well, and I don't think this is a compliment. The role of relatives in life is too important, I believe that certain values can make such people, and I admire people who do it for the sake of justice, but I am absolutely opposed to this practice.

Righteous annihilation may now be a neutral word. Confucius has already admonished: The father is hidden for the son, and the son is hidden for the father.

The basic social needs of the family unit are moral feelings, and if they are only measured by a law that will always have loopholes, then where does the warmth of society exist, and what is the last harbor for people.

Although intellectually speaking, I think that the act of killing relatives in righteousness is very good, and it is particularly selfless, but emotionally speaking, I can't accept it.

The so-called righteous killing of relatives is actually selfishness, as long as it affects your own interests, no matter who you are.

You have betrayed even your relatives, who will save you when you are in danger? Count on society? Wash and sleep. How many poor people there are, not to mention that in addition to poverty, there are all kinds of tragedies. There are only a few, very few, very few lucky people who can get so-called social help.

In fact, the righteous killing of his relatives was also forced and helpless, and he also experienced a fierce ideological struggle. The so-called deep love is responsible.

People who have chosen jurisprudence between human affection and jurisprudence admire this kind of person very much, after all, on one side are relatives who have lived for decades, and on the other side are unquestionable laws.

I admire those who kill relatives with righteousness, especially in the cultural atmosphere of our country, which has always paid attention to family relationships, it is even more admirable to be able to do "righteous annihilation of relatives"!

Sometimes it's right, sometimes it's wrong.

On major matters related to the survival of the country, it is right to kill relatives and save hundreds of millions of people by righteously.

In the little things,The Father is hidden for the Son, and the Son is hidden for the FatherIt is human ethics.

But you're right. This matter is not about "righteous annihilation", you did not harm your family, you just insisted on social morality, you are worthy of praise.

The daughter was educated and punished by ** because her father was driving on the highway and repeatedly persuaded her not to change to ** to report her father. After this incident was reported, netizens had different opinions on it, some praised and some questioned, but why would anyone question such a seemingly unreasonable thing?

I think my daughter's behavior is reasonable. First of all, driving while driving is itself a dangerous act of violating traffic laws. Hitting ** will distract the driver, and holding the mobile phone to grasp the steering wheel with one hand is more likely to cause traffic accidents due to operating errors.

Such an act should have been punished by law. Secondly, picking up ** while driving will pose a threat to the life safety of passengers and drivers in the car, and will also have an impact on other vehicles on the road. In the event of an accident, it is not only yourself who may be harmed, but also other innocent people.

The safety of one's own life and that of others should be taken seriously. In addition, despite the repeated persuasion of his family, his father still did not pay attention to it, and still went his own way, not paying attention to the traffic laws and the advice of his family. He is not aware of the danger of his actions, so he needs to be educated by the authority of punishment to make him realize that his actions are wrong.

The daughter's practice of reporting her father to ** attaches importance to the safety of her own life and the lives of others, and her behavior is in line with the requirements of the law.

However, the key to the questioning of this matter is that the whistleblower is the driver's daughter. Everything in our country's traditional morality revolves around itself. In a society with a differential order pattern, the criteria for judging whether something is right or wrong are defined by the relationship with oneself.

Those who questioned the daughter's behavior in reporting the father in the matter were influenced by this traditional moral concept, and came to the conclusion that the daughter should not report the father based on the relationship between the father and daughter of the two parties. Their judgment of the correctness of this matter is based on the relationship between the two. Presumably, if the whistleblower had been an ordinary passer-by, the voice of doubt would not have been so strong.

Although under the influence of traditional concepts, many people still maintain the concept of "the father is hidden for the son, and the son is hidden for the father", but the society is progressing, the times are developing, and many people have begun to change. In a society governed by the rule of law, we should still put the law first, rather than shielding lawbreakers because of blood relations. Under the extensive implementation of the modern concept of the rule of law, many backward traditional moral concepts should be gradually eliminated by the times, and excellent culture should be inherited.

Only in this way can our society progress, and those traditional cultures that can adapt to today's society can radiate new vitality.

Wan Zhihan 180501

Why is it said that the most terrible virtue is "the destruction of a just cause and the destruction of relatives"? Is "destroying righteousness and destroying relatives" a positive or derogatory meaning? Interested readers can pay attention to the school-easy search.

Justice is a virtue recognized by the prevailing values in today's society. What is Justice? It refers to the act of bravely standing up and reporting the behavior of relatives in order to uphold justice when relatives violate the law. In fact, if you think about it, this is a terrible virtue. Why?

I blame my parents.

This virtue requires us to bravely sacrifice our loved ones for the sake of so-called justice. But who sets this standard of justice? The definition of meaning varies from person to person.

In fact, the so-called meaning is mostly based on the interests of individuals or groups. Successive rulers have often called for justice and passed on values. Although their justice is in the name of the country and the nation, it is ultimately their own interests.

I blame my parents.

Family ethics is the most basic moral bottom line of human beings, and it is also the last chain to maintain interpersonal relationships. If there is no bottom line, how can you call it a person? Even if a person can sacrifice his parents, wife, and children, such a person is extremely terrible, even if he still has the so-called righteousness in his heart.

Anyone who acts for the good of the family must be a ruthless person who will make decisive decisions and refrain from good intentions in war.

Relatives hide from each other.

In ancient societies, both law and morality were valued: the father was the son, and the son was the father, just as Confucius and the sages were respected. The ancients advocated caring for those who loved each other, especially parents and blood relatives.

Even if mistakes are made, they cannot withstand severe prosecution and accusations. Instead, they divert their compassion to protect them. This is normal.

Confucius. Because the ancient rulers knew that the ethics of blood was the foundation of social morality and the guarantee of maintaining the patriarchal family system. Ancient emperors never deceived themselves into believing that a person who could expose his parents and relatives would be loyal to the king of his country.

Ten years of turmoil, family behavior: children report their parents, wives report their husbands, and brothers report younger brothers one after another. It is not uncommon to report that the mother of a child is **.

The bottom line of family separation has been broken. The moral foundations of society have completely collapsed. Without basic trust, all people can become apathetic.

But most of these situations are not for the sake of the so-called just cause, but for their own interests, all for the purpose of improving or maintaining their own spiritual and material status.

Ending kinship and concealing kinship.

It is said that the most terrible reason is that the key to this character is not righteousness and blood, but the annihilation of this word. If you ruin your loved ones, your moral bottom line is broken. These people will no longer have any mental burden to do anything in the future.

What else can a man who can give up his affection do? He has no scruples about his loved ones, and naturally spreads this idea to the outside world and treats others well.

So! Relatives killing people can be covered!

In fact, sometimes I do feel very admired for the people who kill their relatives in righteousness, although sometimes I also think that they are more cold-blooded, but more often than not, what they do is right. Because in many times now, few people can choose to kill their relatives in righteousness, after all, some people they like to help their relatives rather than help, and some people are more emotional. So even when their loved ones do something wrong, they often don't correct it.

At this time, the righteous people who killed their relatives are very worthy of admiration, because they insist on standing on the side of justice. Although sometimes I can't kill my relatives righteously, I really admire them.

When their relatives do something wrong, or commit some crime, often these righteous people will report their relatives。And like this kind of person, they often don't get the approval of their relatives, and they will even be scolded by their relatives, because after all, they are relatives, if he ignores the emotions between the two people at this time and reports him, then this kind of behavior is that outsiders look just very ruthless. But often, sometimes, between the family law and the national law, these righteous people who kill their relatives often choose their own national law and insist on the righteous side, in fact, no one understands themselves, but they still insist on this choice.

I have to say that such a person is really very admirable. They will not choose to shield the person who has done the wrong thing because it is their own relatives, but will dissuade them, or even report them. Although it is said that this has caused damage to the interests of his relatives to a certain extent.

But more than that, he has made a great contribution to our society. Even if they are not understood, even if they are scolded as cold-blooded by others, even if they will encounter a lot of difficulties, they still choose to kill their relatives in righteousness

These people are very ruthless and at the same time a person who does big things. will not give up their morality because of family affection, such a person is very terrible for relatives.

Because his relatives have made mistakes, but as his relatives, he wants to give an explanation to the people who have been hurt, and he must be very painful and tormented in his heart when he kills his relatives in righteousness! I have a lot of admiration for people who have the courage to make sacrifices.

I have to admire such a righteous person who kills his relatives, because in reality, it is really difficult to have such a mindful person who gives up his small family and family affection for the benefit of everyone.

I still don't approve of this approach, no matter what, relatives are people who can always be with you, and killing relatives in righteousness is just a means to gain prestige and popularity.

Like those people who killed their relatives in ancient times, they were Qing officials who said good, and they treated everyone and everything fairly, but they did not have a heart of benevolence, and chose to kill their relatives with righteousness to make themselves famous, and it was indeed their relatives who were hurt.

What's the big deal, without touching the law, everything is easy to solve. If you think it's so serious that you can ignore family affection, others can understand it.