it does not make the bad thing any less bad.
I still don't understand. I'll repost my example from a thread I started.
The story however starts years earlier when Themistocles, a politician and general campaigned for money to build a stronger navy against a probable Persian attack. The Athenians didn’t believe him – comfort, complacent and confident. And most importantly, they’d rather increase their personal wealth of Athenians than do anything to protect the common good.
Feeling strongly the need for a stronger navy, Themistocles did what many politicians have done
throughout the centuries; he lied. He told the
Athenians the small island of Aegina was planning to attack merchant ships, and they need to invest in the navy to protect their commerce. The Athenians agreed to give money to Themistocles’ navy.
Themistocles was proven just when he had built a significant navy to battle Persians forces. The interesting thing to note is Themistocles lie to the Athenians may have saved Ancient Greek civilization. Had the Persians won decisive victories at sea against Themistocles and beaten King Leonidas our modern world culture may be significantly different.
His lie saved lives. Tell me again, how is this bad? Did the Athenians feel butt-hurt from being delivered from their enemies' hands? Rather, were they greatful, even if his outright deception would later somehow hurt their egos a bit?
Here's another. If a thief steals from a thief and gives back to original owner, how is that bad? Do you see the importance of intent, motivation, and end-results? I believe that the ends justify the means.
