Okay, but no residuals from repeat broadcasts.
I would do all of them if only my mouth wasn’t so small.
Fuck that, I’m going on strike. When you lose a quarter of the population, you’ll come crawling on your hands and knees begging me to present my ass to the Mandrills.
A show like that would be 100% gross.
CANT. BREATHE.
Laughing…too…hard.
Ouch!
This is killin’ me.
Is the baby hot?
Rape a baby? No.
But make sweet sweet love to one that wanted it? Sure! 
only if it was deep fried first.
Damn, now I’m hungry.
I know the answer to this:
The Aristocrats!
Bryan Eckers, Boyo Jim…ya’ll are stupid!!
ETA: Not stupid for real. I mean you guys are cracking me up.
Absolutely nothing makes my or mine’s life more special than yours. That’s the point. Neither is your life more special than my kid’s.
I really don’t see how people are justifying not doing everything humanly possible to keep their own children alive. It’s completely, utterly bizarre to me. Basically, you’re saying that you’ve been given a choice that will 100% save your kid, but you’re not going to take it. Why? Let’s review the reasons:
- You and the kid will be permanently emotionally scarred.
- Someone else’s life isn’t worth less than your own child’s.
- It’s immoral.
- Society frowns upon that.
- There might be vengeance takers.
Well, let’s see. #1 can be immediately cast aside as irrelevant. In my mind, being alive is usually quite preferable to being dead. That includes being alive and feeling a bit guilty. Since the scenario isn’t completely described, we can even speculate that the child doesn’t even have to know what you did to save them. They might not understand, if they are young. Alternately, both my kid and I might just oh, I don’t know, get over it.
#2 I addressed above, but I think this connects nicely with #3 as well. In essence, the naysayers are arguing that because killing someone else is immoral I should allow my child to be killed. Think about that for a moment. You are necessarily indirectly killing your own kid. Infanticide. That’s right. If you don’t kill that innocent stranger, you’re going to go to bed tonight with the weight of your child’s death on your shoulders. You could have saved them.
BUT, according to many on this board, you could be content with that. You could essentially be content with trading your own moral righteousness for your son or daughter’s life. That is sick.
As to #4, again, I don’t see how this is relevant. How society sees or remembers you shouldn’t really be coming into a life and death equation. And besides, I don’t think many of the people driveling on about this crap realize that the public might actually be sympathetic toward a person who made this decision.
Actually, we have plenty of movies, stories, books, etc. that depict very similar sympathetic characters. The once noble nuclear physicist forced to work in the labs of an arch villain who happens to have the physicist’s daughter locked in a nearby cell. Do you really want me to list examples of heroes and other positive, sympathetic characters in literature and film who displayed this exact kind of thinking?
No one said that we wouldn’t feel remorse afterward or during, after all.
As to #5, we can only cross that bridge when we get to it. If someone tries to kill you or your kid, you should defend yourself and your kid with all you have. For the “perfect stranger” in this scenario, if he/she could fight, I would expect them to do so. I’d have the utmost pity for them. I’d understand that they need to fight too. And if they won, I don’t think that I could blame them for the death of my child. I understand that they, too, are just trying to live.
I’ve written on this before because, frankly, this place has a penchant for goofy hypotheticals.
Some choices are just plain wrong, period. And if you think that you’re justified in ending the lives of multiple innocents to save your offspring, then regardless of your protestations, you DO think that your child’s life is more special than theirs.
Please explain “just plain wrong.” Do you mean “just plain wrong” in the same sense that people who explain that interracial marriage is “just plain wrong”?
Also, whether I, the parent of the child in question, feel that my kid is more important is irrelevant. Objectively, there’s nothing more important about any of the individuals involved. You just restated what I said. There’s nothing inherently more special about any of us.
How is that hard to understand?
“Just plain wrong” is a catchphrase that people insert into discussion when they mean “I’ve given my opinion and you should now stop talking about this.”
You’re absolutely right.
Could anyone please give me some reasons why the life of their child is worth more than the life of someone else’s child, or even the lives of a multitude of other children? What is it that your child is going to contribute that is worth murdering innocents for?
Your mistake here is that you assume everybody takes the global point of view, and that people do what they do to benefit humanity as a whole. I admit that my own child is no more special than other children in any objective sense; however, his value to me is greater than his value to anyone ese, and greater than the value of any other childern to me - just as I expect other parents to hold their own childern in higher value than they do mine.
Furthermore, there’s also the issue of responsiblity. No matter what my child’s value may be, I have a resopnsibility towards him as a parent I do not have towards other childeren. In effect, I will treat him *as if * he has a greater value than he actually has because according to my belief system, I value things I am responsible for more.
“Value” is a subjective term; so is “worth”. I personally attribute greater value to people who attribute greater value to me. It’s a two-way relationship. In the eyes of humanity as a whole, I have very little value, if at all. In the eyes of my countrymen, I have a slightly higher value. In the eyes of my family members my value is very high indeed, and therefore I accord them the same treatment.
Now, if could assure me that the whole of humaninty valued me as higly as they did their own friends, family and counrymen, I would attibute the same value to everyone. But I don’t see that happening.