[TorbjornLunde]

Different moral considerations sometimes come in conflict forcing you to choose between different compromises.

Avoiding harm is a moral principle I'm sure many share and there are cases where this conflicts with being honest. If you go down this “you should never lie” you are effectively choosing to do the harm because you prioritise honesty. Maybe that's right in that situation, but you are doing a compromise between ethical principles in either case.

Personally I used to be never-ever-lie dogmatic, but as I've lived my thinking as evolved and I definitely think there exists cases where lying is the more ethical option. However, it's important to me that it's strongly ethically justified and not just something you do because it's the most easy or whatever.

[claudiawerner]

>If you go down this “you should never lie” you are effectively choosing to do the harm because you prioritise honesty.

The framing of morality as between prioritizing certain morals over others is only a particular way of viewing it - the consequentialist way. For deontological metaethics, you have something like a categorical imperative.