The value of life Options

[andriaalazing*]

well der, i value life. my own and others. but if this one boy could kill hundreds, including myself, id definately kill him. for his sake and ours.

[CrazayChristian]

Well...I value my life yes, but it's either your responsability to kill one kid or it's your fault for th infection of hundreds as well as the death of this kid.

The war is benificial for everyone, the reason the whole thing came about is because Clinton took the CIA budget away so we couldn't track Osama and then we pulled out of the gulf war so quickly and let all this escalate again. I don't like war, but some times you have to do things you don't want for the benefit of everyone. Like the kid, if we had let this go, there would have been even worse consequences, possible a nuclear attack.

[xlauren73x]

if i were the boy, i would want someone to kill me. i cherish other peoples lives over myself, mostly my family and 7 best friends. i would give up my life for theirs anyday, so if i had to give up my life to save my school i would. however i still dont agree with abortion.. there are other ways to stop poverty and overpopulation..

[illumineering]

This isn't a real dilemma. (Based on the scenario that started the thread.)
Killing the host of the virus won't contain the rate of infection. The whole area needs to be quarrantined and decontaminated. Killing the kid in 10 minutes won't change anything. The likelihood of infection is based on proximity to the carrier. Isolation, sterilization and education are the most effective ways to contain an outbreak.

[SillyCourtney]

This isn't a real dilemma.  (Based on the scenario that started the thread.)
Killing the host of the virus won't contain the rate of infection.  The whole area needs to be quarrantined and decontaminated.  Killing the kid in 10 minutes won't change anything.  The likelihood of infection is based on proximity to the carrier.  Isolation, sterilization and education are the most effective ways to contain an outbreak.

No, it's not a real dilemma. It was just a made-up example. It was just for you to answer on what would you do.. not really to be taken seriously.

But yes, I would kill the child. No reason to infect others.

As for abortion.. I'm with you. Give a lady a choice for crying out loud! This world is already so overpopulated, why have another baby you can't take care of or that you don't want? AND, if you don't want the baby and you have to keep it, you're not exactly going to love it and take care of it. This will definetly hurt the child's self-esteem and self-value. And who would want that?

[Paradox of Life]

No, it's not a real dilemma. It was just a made-up example. It was just for you to answer on what would you do.. not really to be taken seriously.

But yes, I would kill the child. No reason to infect others.

As for abortion.. I'm with you. Give a lady a choice for crying out loud! This world is already so overpopulated, why have another baby you can't take care of or that you don't want? AND, if you don't want the baby and you have to keep it, you're not exactly going to love it and take care of it. This will definetly hurt the child's self-esteem and self-value. And who would want that?

I was afraid you'd start saying "BUT IT'S MURDER!!"

Anyway, how is this about life value? How much value in life can a kid have when he's a safety threat to everyone around him and his last option is to die? Um, is it not obvious? Kill the kid so you can save everyone else and end his misery. I have value in my own life; perhaps less than others, but there are things in life that I value and wouldn't want to give up. I think I'm getting sidetracked now. How's this a debate?

[sadolakced acid]

This isn't a real dilemma.  (Based on the scenario that started the thread.)
Killing the host of the virus won't contain the rate of infection.  The whole area needs to be quarrantined and decontaminated.  Killing the kid in 10 minutes won't change anything.  The likelihood of infection is based on proximity to the carrier.  Isolation, sterilization and education are the most effective ways to contain an outbreak.

killing a host usually kills the virus.

viruses need living cells.

dead people aren't useful for viruses. therefore; the virus will attempt to spread in any way possible.

but killing the person and incinerating them (don't let them drip anything) will kill the virus.

[Shahin]

Right off the bat, I would kill the kid. Just like that. Hell, if the needle broke I'd club him to death with the closest geometry book.

Do I value life? Yes, I treat it preciously because you never know when it's going to be taken away from you. But I would do absolutely anything to protect the lives of my friends. I would kill for them, I'd die for them. If anything were to threaten one of my friends lives I would step in the way or get them out of it. I value their lives far and away above my own. Loyalty. My number 1 attribute.

[illumineering]

QUOTE(illumineering @ Jul 12 2005, 10:46 AM)
This isn't a real dilemma. (Based on the scenario that started the thread.)
Killing the host of the virus won't contain the rate of infection. The whole area needs to be quarrantined and decontaminated. Killing the kid in 10 minutes won't change anything. The likelihood of infection is based on proximity to the carrier. Isolation, sterilization and education are the most effective ways to contain an outbreak.






killing a host usually kills the virus.

viruses need living cells.

dead people aren't useful for viruses. therefore; the virus will attempt to spread in any way possible.

but killing the person and incinerating them (don't let them drip anything) will kill the virus.


My point was that the likelihood of contamination would have already been established through close contact with the kid. The possibility of infection remains even if someone kills him. You are misinterpreting my statement. Look at the CDC protocol for the virus.

[aznxdreamer]

i think its fair that we should sacrifice one life in order to say many others, no matter who that one life is. whether its the president of the united states or some bum on the streets. 2+ lives are better than one.

[starlette]

I value my own life, only for the fact that I feel I was put thru shit and crap thru my shildhood, and I feel I have a reason for existing. Because of the abuse andloniness I epericened thru my childhood, I feel that I have a purpose...a mission. So I value my life immensly. I feel I survived what I did to make a difference. Having said that, I also do not value my life over that of others. I also think that sacrificing some for the greater good isnt always right, because, using the example of the war in iraq, who the hell are we to dtermine the greater good? Who are we to play God? I mean, to kill a psychopath just to stop him from murdering many innocent people, sure, but sacrificing a few for what someone beleives to be a step towards progress??? I don't know about all that. But then again, I don't know much about progress. I think violence should be avoided at all costs. I think everylife should be valused. I mean, I feel like I was put here for a reason...whos to say there arent others that are being murdered who also had a purpose in life that can never be fufilled?

[dao]

ok... he will die anyways.. if you dont get somewhere ... he got ebola.. i watched something on that... it was freaky...

[starlette]

ok... he will die anyways.. if you dont get  somewhere ... he got ebola.. i watched something on that... it was freaky...

You wanna learn some scary facts about ebola?? Read the book the hot zone. One of the best book I ever read. All based on actual events in history, assembled in story format by a man who came in contact with different people studying the virus. Arguably one of the most dangerous organisms on the plante.r No exact prigin, but deadly as hell. Its called he hot zone. the crazy thing about ebola, is that breathing the same air as a peson with ebola, you can catch it. There is a strand of the virus that will kill 9 out of 10 people exposed to it. This means, if somone got on an airplane, had it, and didnt know it (they usually dont find out until you die) most of those people would catch it, ten they would all spread out, and it would wipe out 90% of the worlds population. The crazy thing is it could, but it never has. Scary huh? So yeah. If that little boy did have ebola, u might as well give up now lol. :D

[*Weird addiction*]

1. About the boy...i wouldn't call it killing...there's actually nothing to debate about in this case. The boy is going to die anyways, and if the right action isn't taken, thousands of people will die...so you get the picture.

2. As for abortion, i think it's wrong. Overpopulation?
a. you had unprotected sex...sure it was fun, now you aren't even thinking of the consequences (a baby). That's stupid. Like it or not, the baby is YOUR responsibility...if you don't want it, give it up for adoption but don't take it's life...because it's murder.

b. let's say you were raped...not your fault at all...but still...you have no right to take a baby's life...like i said earlier, give it up for adoption...but don't abort it...it's just wrong...

[sadolakced acid]

1. About the boy...i wouldn't call it killing...there's actually nothing to debate about in this case. The boy is going to die anyways, and if the right action isn't taken, thousands of people will die...so you get the picture.

2. As for abortion, i think it's wrong. Overpopulation?
a. you had unprotected sex...sure it was fun, now you aren't even thinking of the consequences (a baby). That's stupid. Like it or not, the baby is YOUR responsibility...if you don't want it, give it up for adoption but don't take it's life...because it's murder.

b. let's say you were raped...not your fault at all...but still...you have no right to take a baby's life...like i said earlier, give it up for adoption...but don't abort it...it's just wrong...

go to the abortion thread. we'll talk about that there.

[*Weird addiction*]

^ LMAO... believe it or not, i had a feeling someone was going to say that...

[aznxdreamer]

i dont think this topic is about the boy and the school but about the value of life people...

[sadolakced acid]

there's an easy way to find out.

apply for life insurance.

the value of life is very, very cheap.
another thing wrong with society.

[*anubis*]

i would be willing to sacrafice my own life to save or prevent others from harm or even death, themselves.

it just depends on how things are for each individual i guess.

[nesquik]

If this was a real situation, a trained doctor would not kill anyone simply because of legal issues. The thing is 10 minutes in an emergancy is a long time, the kid would be immediately quarantined especially if the doctor could diagnose the disease on the spot.

As far as the developing human fetus. I personally would not consider it murder until the fetus was self aware or in another words, almost fully developed if not fully developed.

[Sumiaki]

Egg ZackTLee

I believe this debate is over.

[sikdragon]

a baby isn't self aware.

[Spirited Away]

Egg ZackTLee

  I believe this debate is over.   

I'm sorry? What?