Wrestling with Pacifism

I don't think there's a pacifist in the world who, in discussing the convictions s/he has no doubt painfully wrestled with, has not been asked, usually by a smug conservative who mistakes hyperbole for rational argumentation, "Well, what if someone broke into your house and was going to kill your spouse and children? Are you saying you wouldn't kill him to protect your family?"

I've been considering this question a lot lately, especially now that I have a wife and we're in an unfamiliar place; I suddenly feel much more protective. I still hate the question, first of all because, as I have said before, I don't believe in developing a normative ethic based on my actions while under extreme stress. But now I have two other reasons.

The second reason is that this scenario has nothing to do with modern warfare. So, yes, I would be willing to defend my family against an intruder, but if you want to make that correspond to war, the question needs to be phrased thusly: "If someone broke into your home to kill your spouse and children, would you kill him? And to follow up, would you find out where he lived and blow it up? Would you find out where his kids went to school and blow it up? Would you then find where all the people who look like him gather and use all of the resources at your disposal, including your children's college funds and your savings to destroy them, bankrupting yourself in the process with the dim gleam of hope that after ruining all the people who had a hand in breaking into your house, they will pay off your debt?" My answer to that question is, "No." Which is why I still call myself a pacifist. (To phrase the question in order to make it correspond precisely with this current "War on Terror" would be so absurd as to be laughable, and since I want to keep this conversation serious, I made generalizations.)

Third, the original question ignores any thought of a solution. Most people who ask it consider war to be the solution to international aggression. Does that mean that they think killing burglars is the solution to crime? Sadly, I think many of them do. But it isn't. Poverty, homelessness, racism, and greed seem to be root issues which lead to burglary, and these issues need to be addressed in order to find a solution. Likewise, similar issues need to be addressed to prevent international aggression (here's a novel idea, maybe the U.S. should stop being the aggressor!). So while I would kill a burglar to protect my family, I recognize that it is not a solution, so I still oppose the death penalty.

Convictions are difficult to live with, and mine are ever being reevaluated. I may be too violent for some pacifists, and I know that I am too peaceable for just war theorists (and those who throw considerations of justice out the window tied to a grenade). So let's recognize that we are all on the same journey of trying to figure out how to live justly and love mercy and not be so cock-sure as to think we can destroy another person's convictions with a catch-phrase.

In that light, please understand that I don't imagine that I have disproved just-war theory. It also is a conviction, and I know many people who have wrestled with it and remain just-war theorists. I am merely defending my conviction against a poorly wrought attack.

Please use the following comments section for further wrestling.