How many people's lives should you prevent from being killed in order to justify killing people to save them?
It's said that "All life is precious". Of course that is untrue. The lives of evil people are not worth saving as much as saving the lives of the "good" people. Who decides which is which? Why?
Culture war? That's a laugh Sharon. The gaslighter-in-chief and all his toady sycophants including all the "best" people he has hired who are crooks criminals traitors are the antithesis of culture. They are all the scum and slime that previously lived in the dark under rocks until the gaslighter freed them to infect our country. So its slime and scum versus human beings and currently the slime and scum have the power. The power structure with few exceptions consist of the uncultured that has been magically elevated. SIGH. Just my opinion of course. Thank you for your reply! :)
What if I said killing 1 mass murderer would save 1000 lives? That seems like a good thing, right? Then, I started thinking deeper into the possibilities.
What if I believe that the Earth is overpopulated, and humans are responsible for climate change and the growing number of species suffering extinction because of it? Then wouldn't I think those 1000 deaths were removing some of the problem humans cause?
What if I knew that 20 of those people would each cause hundreds of other people to suffer? Then allowing those 1000 deaths would actually save more people from suffering in the long run.
But yeah ... I'm honest enough to admit that's all academic/philosophical. We live in the "here and now", not what is a future possibility. So if it came down to 1 vs 1000 now ... unless those 1000 were all "bad guys" ... I'd choose to kill the 1.
So you would kill 1 to save a thousand. Would you kill a thousand to save 1? What if the thousand were all saintly and good and the one was an evil monstrous human with blood on his hands and hate in his heart? It depends on who has the power. I can see the gaslighter-in-chief riling up his toady sycophants to go out and kill his critics. Masses of them locked and loaded and drunk as skunks shouting LOCK HER UP LOCK HER UP LOCK HER UP! Without batting an eyelash or thinking twice about it. It would be a GREAT GOOD in their eyes taking out any and all who dislike despise their golden child. Not hyperbole. I truly believe when all the pieces are in place that is exactly what will happen. The rallies turn so-called humans into a mob of one mind. Put loaded weapons in their hands. Give them some booze or drugs and point them in any direction and watch out. That is where we are right now. At his El Paso rally someone assaulted a journalist. When gasbag tells folks that the media is the enemy of the people they believe him. What do you do to enemies? You take him out. As gasbag continues his rallies goading his peeps and riling them up into a frenzy (he gets off on that) we are getting closer and closer to an explosion and rioting. I wouldn't get near any rally of his. Would you? Stay tuned Walt. It is just a matter of time. Thank you for your reply.
This post was edited by RosieG at February 13, 2019 2:26 AM MST
As you've read me saying before, Rosie ... I firmly believe Trump's election is the natural result of the divisiveness both the Republicans and Democrats (as well as the media) have been encouraging in America for decades. And both parties have been getting more and more strident and abusive in their push to divide America against itself. Whether the consequences are "unintended" or not, those in power have been "asking" for it for decades - if not generations.
America is being pushed towards a civil war ... and it will be far more deadly than the last one, because the lines will not be along state borders. We will be divided by ethnicity and politics.
It scares me bigly Walt. The gun people have a leg up fer shure. The non-guns like me are terrified of even holding a gun. Guns kill living things. Even if we armed ourselves we have no experience shooting anything. How to clean a gun. How to take it apart and put it back together again. Although why you'd need to know that I don't know. But I see it in movies a lot. The first civil war was based on hate and so too will the second one be. Only our weapons are more evil and vicious and deadly. At my age I say "so what..bring it on suckers!". So I die. But what of all the others who haven't had a chance to live their lives? What becomes of them? The monsters will win. They have no rules. They do what they have to do to win no matter how ugly or dastardly or evil.The nonguns are no match for them in any way at any level. Oh frabjous day! Thank you for your reply Walt! To the victor belongs the spoils. The gasbag is a big one for taking the spoils. He is a firm advocate of that. Who gets them?. He does of course. :(
This post was edited by RosieG at February 13, 2019 7:09 AM MST
I read a scenario where the war was fought mostly without guns. Basically, farmers refused to feed the cities. Imagine the millions who would slowly starve, and the chaos created in cities without food. It would turn people on the same side against each other.
WM BARR . =ABSOLUTE TRASH 