Take this statement:
If the only reason you do good things is because you are afraid of going to hell, you are not really a good person.
I can accept that. If the only reason you do anything good is to avoid being punished, well yeah, you are not
Take a slightly different look at that axiom.
If the only reason you do good things is because someone is holding a gun to your head, then you are not a good person.
Pretty much identical, yes?
The first axiom sort of supposes a supernatural being who will pass judgment on humans when we exit this life.
The second posits Person B forces Person A to do good things. A very real threat. If Person A does not do good things, Person B is going to deliver Person A to the afterlife.
If you hold a gun to someone's head to make them do good things, you are not a good person.
Well, maybe you are a good person by your definition. May your definition of good and moral behavior means forcing people to do something against their will.
Does it make a difference if two people are holding guns? Three? A dozen? 10,000? A million?
Where is the breaking point?
I am truly confused. I have close friends who have no problem slinging the first axiom around like it is a scythe. But bring up axiom No. 2 with real life examples and they are not so eager to start a harvest. After the examples, bring up Point 3 and all hell breaks loose with tangents exploding faster than a ton of Tannerite on a redneck 4th of July.
Let's make this personal. If you hold a gun to my head to make me do good things, what does that say about you?
I am genuinely curious.