Printable View
I would torture the baby, of course I would. I wouldn't think twice. I think almost everyone would say they would... of course, being put in that situation you may well find that you wouldn't be able to do it. I think I would though, I can be a cold and heartless ******* at times.
As for question two, I would let them die fer sure. I wouldn't let myself die for the sake of others unless I was going to be seen as like, a full on hero for it.
I wouldn't be able to torture a baby. I'm guessing the deaths of the people of London would be pretty quick, so I would see torturing a baby as the worse option.
The second question really depends on my circumstances. I mean I couldn't do that to my family but if I had no family, I'd possibly consider it. Put it like this, I'd be way more likely to agree to die to save others than to torture a baby. End of.
Couldnt even considering torturing the baby, thats just sick in the head, i would rather die.
1 life vs thousands, lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergio
Torturing the baby is the better option, not worse :P
Torture the baby. The intrests of the thousands of people in London are greater than that of this one baby.Quote:
Originally Posted by SauravG
Evidently you either didn't read the post properly or you don't understand this at all. Both options are sick - both options will result in something very nasty happening, but one must be chosen. You dying ISN'T an answer. You must choose to torture the baby or allow thousands of people to die (in painful ways aswell). If you don't want to answer the question then don't post, otherwise your post is utterly pointless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Titch
The whole idea is about morality: both are wrong, so you must act morally wrong but with good intentions (saving thousands of people, or not causing pain to a baby).
No because the baby isn't gonna die, it's just going to suffer. Quick death is better than that kind of suffering.Quote:
Originally Posted by scottish
Remember those in London will experience pain. Many will die instantly, those who don't will have radiation poisoning and thus be in as much pain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergio
So you'd take the guilt of thousands of deaths being on your shoulder just to save one kid from some suffering.
I do understand the question.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitman
*REMOVED*
Edited by invincible (Forum Super Moderator): Please don't make inappropriate comments
From what you said before it appeared that you didn't, but what you've posted now shows you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Titch
Your answers are interesting... first is different to everybody else's. Maybe so but many babies (children, men and women too) will be in a lot of pain and will die.
They're dying because they don't have the organ, but if they do then they'll be fine.