Controversial question, no doubt, but I wanted to ask:
From time to time there are people who are martyred in a sense, and whose deaths trigger some major societal reform, or legal reform, or big political change in attitude, etc. So for instance, suppose that the killing of your unarmed teenaged son or daughter on the streets would lead to big change in police accountability, etc. (of course, it hasn’t in the US, but let’s say for the hypothetical that you knew for certain that it would.)
And so what I wanted to ask was whether Doper parents would “let” their children be martyrs - not “let” in the sense of, “OK, Junior, go get killed by police brutality today”, of course, but rather, more like, “let” in the sense of, if you somehow had the power to control whether your child lived or died, would you “veto” their death, even if their death triggered widespread societal reform for a good cause?
Kind of like, would you let your child be a Rosa Parks (although, for this analogy, we wouldn’t be talking about mere arrest, but rather, death or severe physical harm?)
What about protesting against a repressive regime? Would you “let” your son or daughter be at the forefront of protesting against a Nazi-like government, even if it meant a very high chance of their getting shot dead by riot police or tortured?
Would the 9/11 hijackers count? Sept 11th did bring massive change to the US foreign policy and mentality involving terrorism across the world.
I’m not a parent but I don’t think I’d mind my brother or sister being a martyr. I don’t know how the family members of the hijackers feel; definitely some shame given people know who they were but then again others in the family/extended family probably believe they were justified so…
I have said it before and I will say it again, if it somehow comes down to every single man, woman and child in China and India or one of my children, you better hope that your favorite recipes have already been imported because there are about to be some gaping holes in the world population map. You can add in whoever else you want, it really doesn’t matter. I am a huge believer in sociobiology and there is no point where any number of unrelated strangers are more important to me than my own kids.
I have already lost one child and I am not doing it again. The question sounds absurd to me personally but I realize that more idealistic types may not feel that way.
I have to put in the disclaimer that I am not a parent.
But I can totally imagine a situation where–although I’m not thrilled that one of my 16 children has signed up to be a matyr–I’m not exactly heart-broken over it either. Especially if his or her sacrifice will result in tangible benefits for the family. Especially if death is a daily occurrence. Especially if he or she isn’t my favorite kid anyway, and in fact, I struggle to say I even like them since they constantly work my nerves.
But if I only have two kids and I’ve invested a crapload of time and resources into their development so as to maximize how wonderful and loveable they are? I’ll be hell-bent on keeping them out of harm’s way.
If any actual parents chose option one, I postulate that they woke up this morning to find that the dishes had once AGAIN been left in the sink over night and they are just still ticked off about it.
No, I’m sorry. You’ll have to find another way to save society. I am lucky enough to have an extra justification for my selfishness: my daughter is an actual certified soaring genius. So whatever good you were going to get from her death, I am sure her life will mean more to the world.
I asked my husband, and he answered hell no to definite death even in the face of societal change. But yes, supportive but scared to potential harm while standing up for their beliefs.
All right, let’s drop the word martyr, and let’s forget Islam entirely.
Were Andrew Goodman and Mickey Schwerner looking for glorious martyrdom when they became Freedom Riders? Of course not! But they knew what they were doing could be dangerous, and they did it anyway. They were, I suppose, “martyrs” in the cause of civil rights. They were genuine heroes.
Would I want my son to be murdered and left in a shallow, unmarked grave? Of COURSE not! But if he took part in an equally dangerous but equally noble cause, I wouldn’t try to stop him. Selfishly, I’d rather have my son with me than off doing good deeds in a place where that could get him killed. I’d be terrified every moment he was away, but I’d never try to stop him from doing something good just because I’M afraid.
In the 1981 Irish Hunger Strike, four of the 23 strikers were taken off the strike by their parents (I assume this means that the parents authorized force-feeding to save their sons’ lives).
If they were your sons, would you support their wishes and their principles at the cost of their lives?