Following on from episode one’s discussion of the bombing of Hiroshima, Daniel Strand and Marc LiVecche discuss reactions and counterarguments to their defense of the bomb. They discuss the nature of evaluating moral dilemmas and determining proper responses, the reality of moral tragedy, the importance of context and consequence in moral decisions, the role of rules, and the (qualified) reality of moral absolutes. Questions arise about the difference between a focus on personal piety versus pursuing shalom, legalism versus relativism, and the prospect of revitalizing Protestant ethicist Paul Ramsey’s account of moral rules as a way to clarify the contours of faith and moral life.