A Moral Choice?

Let us say that YOU are in the hot seat in your nation.

You had a choice.

You could either see a cure for ALL cancers developed.

But at a cost.

You would no longer be able to have a military?

Would you do that trade?

Save all those great people all that pain, and slow death, by endosring the cure for cancers?

Remember, you would have to forgo an army, therefore, you might feel it more likely that your nation would be under greater threat, therefore, NOT want to do the trade, as hard as that is to turn down?

My thoughts.

I would bite yer arm off if you offered me that deal.

It would be immoral of me to know that I could help so many people, and not choose to do it.

Don't think I could look myself in the mirror.

And while we would no longer have a conventinal military, we could have a sort of home guard, lest there be any kind of invasion?

These volunteers could be trained to protect the people and land?

And greater police intelligence is a more effective defence against terrorists than conventional military can ever be, therefore, we could increase in that area.

So, comforted by all of that, my answer is 'yes', I would do that deal, even if there was a small increase in risk of attack.

You?

I'd make a treaty with other nations that I would accept this deal (assuming that I was the only national leader offered this deal) in exchange for their agreement to never attack my country, and also make an agreement with allies that if someone were to break the treaty that they would use their forces combined with volunteers from my own nation to defend our country.

But I'd definitely say yes.

lisan23 wrote:I'd make a treaty with other nations that I would accept this deal (assuming that I was the only national leader offered this deal) in exchange for their agreement to never attack my country, and also make an agreement with allies that if someone were to break the treaty that they would use their forces combined with volunteers from my own nation to defend our country.

But I'd definitely say yes.

Imagine there is no such global treaty.

Just a straight down the line choice.

I'd still say yes.

Cartoon Head wrote:Let us say that YOU are in the hot seat in your nation.

You had a choice.

You could either see a cure for ALL cancers developed.

But at a cost.

You would no longer be able to have a military?

Would you do that trade?

Save all those great people all that pain, and slow death, by endosring the cure for cancers?

Remember, you would have to forgo an army, therefore, you might feel it more likely that your nation would be under greater threat, therefore, NOT want to do the trade, as hard as that is to turn down?

My thoughts.

I would bite yer arm off if you offered me that deal.

It would be immoral of me to know that I could help so many people, and not choose to do it.

Don't think I could look myself in the mirror.

And while we would no longer have a conventinal military, we could have a sort of home guard, lest there be any kind of invasion?

These volunteers could be trained to protect the people and land?

And greater police intelligence is a more effective defence against terrorists than conventional military can ever be, therefore, we could increase in that area.

So, comforted by all of that, my answer is 'yes', I would do that deal, even if there was a small increase in risk of attack.

You?

Yea I would. As long as part of the deal was my country would be the only one the cure was given to, and it was administered throughout the world by us.





You said no military. You didn't say anything about giving up the weapons. A well equipped home guard, that's what I'm talking about!

CarolinaHound wrote:As long as part of the deal was my country would be the only one the cure was given to, and it was administered throughout the world by us.

Is it just me, or does that not contradict?

You seem to be saying you'd want it kept purely for people of your country, then something about your country doing something around the world?

Can you explain, please?

Thanks

lisan23 wrote:I'd still say yes.

Okay, I will do another, and remember, these are merely hypothetical, and have no resemblance to people alive or dead

A close parent is kidnapped.

So is your present love/spouse.

One of them HAS to be executed.

And it is up to you.

If you refuse to make a choice, both would be killed, which would logically be of no use to anyone.

*Sorry for going all 'Saw' on ya, here*

I think he means that he controls the cure, so that if another country threatens to attack, he can cut off their "cure" for cancer.

Cartoon Head wrote:

lisan23 wrote:I'd still say yes.

Okay, I will do another, and remember, these are merely hypothetical, and have no resemblance to people alive or dead

A close parent is kidnapped.

So is your present love/spouse.

One of them HAS to be executed.

And it is up to you.

If you refuse to make a choice, both would be killed, which would logically be of no use to anyone.

*Sorry for going all 'Saw' on ya, here*

As horrible as it sounds - I'd go with my parent. I'm close to both my parents and love them very much, but my siblings and I are all grown. My husband has 2 young kids who still need him to very much be a part of their lives.

lisan23 wrote:

Cartoon Head wrote:

lisan23 wrote:I'd still say yes.

Okay, I will do another, and remember, these are merely hypothetical, and have no resemblance to people alive or dead

A close parent is kidnapped.

So is your present love/spouse.

One of them HAS to be executed.

And it is up to you.

If you refuse to make a choice, both would be killed, which would logically be of no use to anyone.

*Sorry for going all 'Saw' on ya, here*

As horrible as it sounds - I'd go with my parent. I'm close to both my parents and love them very much, but my siblings and I are all grown. My husband has 2 young kids who still need him to very much be a part of their lives.

So would I, if it were my dad.

That sounds mean, but he is in his 70's, while my g/f is 29. If it were my mother it would be so so hard. Whatever I chose, I don't think I could ever properly get over what I had done, even under those conditions.

Cartoon Head wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:As long as part of the deal was my country would be the only one the cure was given to, and it was administered throughout the world by us.

Is it just me, or does that not contradict?

You seem to be saying you'd want it kept purely for people of your country, then something about your country doing something around the world?

Can you explain, please?

Thanks

Well, since we would have no military to defend ourselves with, our only protection would be the knowledge of how to make the cure. A safeguard from attack is what I was meaning. I wouldn't keep it from the world, but I wouldn't allow the world to know how to reproduce it. Sort of like if we were on the playground and you wanted to play ball but the ball was mine, if you want to play with my ball you best be nice to me.

lisan23 wrote:I think he means that he controls the cure, so that if another country threatens to attack, he can cut off their "cure" for cancer.

Yea, you got the idea.

CarolinaHound wrote:

Cartoon Head wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:As long as part of the deal was my country would be the only one the cure was given to, and it was administered throughout the world by us.

Is it just me, or does that not contradict?

You seem to be saying you'd want it kept purely for people of your country, then something about your country doing something around the world?

Can you explain, please?

Thanks

Well, since we would have no military to defend ourselves with, our only protection would be the knowledge of how to make the cure. A safeguard from attack is what I was meaning. I wouldn't keep it from the world, but I wouldn't allow the world to know how to reproduce it. Sort of like if we were on the playground and you wanted to play ball but the ball was mine, if you want to play with my ball you best be nice to me.

Gotcha!

Okay, here is one to muse over.

If you HAD to abandon one, in all aspects, would it be your wife/partner, or your religion?

Cartoon Head wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:

Cartoon Head wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:As long as part of the deal was my country would be the only one the cure was given to, and it was administered throughout the world by us.

Is it just me, or does that not contradict?

You seem to be saying you'd want it kept purely for people of your country, then something about your country doing something around the world?

Can you explain, please?

Thanks

Well, since we would have no military to defend ourselves with, our only protection would be the knowledge of how to make the cure. A safeguard from attack is what I was meaning. I wouldn't keep it from the world, but I wouldn't allow the world to know how to reproduce it. Sort of like if we were on the playground and you wanted to play ball but the ball was mine, if you want to play with my ball you best be nice to me.

Gotcha!

Okay, here is one to muse over.

If you HAD to abandon one, in all aspects, would it be your wife/partner, or your religion?

I can't answer that one honestly because I'm single right. Given my past experiances, probably the woman cause odd would be great that I would be tired of them. They say that one true love that lasts forever is out there, but I aint seen it yet. Now if you say lose my children, then the religion would have to go.

CarolinaHound wrote:

Cartoon Head wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:

Cartoon Head wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:As long as part of the deal was my country would be the only one the cure was given to, and it was administered throughout the world by us.

Is it just me, or does that not contradict?

You seem to be saying you'd want it kept purely for people of your country, then something about your country doing something around the world?

Can you explain, please?

Thanks

Well, since we would have no military to defend ourselves with, our only protection would be the knowledge of how to make the cure. A safeguard from attack is what I was meaning. I wouldn't keep it from the world, but I wouldn't allow the world to know how to reproduce it. Sort of like if we were on the playground and you wanted to play ball but the ball was mine, if you want to play with my ball you best be nice to me.

Gotcha!

Okay, here is one to muse over.

If you HAD to abandon one, in all aspects, would it be your wife/partner, or your religion?

I can answer that one honestly because I'm single right. Given my past experiances, probably the woman cause odd would be great that I would be tired of them. They say that one true love that lasts forever is out there, but I aint seen it yet. Now if you say lose my children, then the religion would have to go.

Okay.

That then.

What would you say to anyone that said they would opt for their 'faith' over their kids..?

You didn't say faith, you said religion. No one can honestly give up their faith if they have faith in something. Religion and faith are two different things in my opinion.

Oh btw, I'd say they were nuts if they didn't lie and say they'd give it up for their children. But to just say "ok I have no more faith" is impossible.

CarolinaHound wrote:Oh btw, I'd say they were nuts if they didn't lie and say they'd give it up for their children. But to just say "ok I have no more faith" is impossible.

No it's not.

You can choose to abandon faith in anything, if you are of a mind to.

Just as you can choose to have faith in something.

It is not something you are born with, it is something learned. Therefore, it can be unlearned, hence the declining numbers attending church, and being interested in god, in much of the modern world.

Ok, if you had a choice between losing your child or believe in God, could you honestly do it? Could you "honestly" lose your faith, beyond any shadow of doubt that there is no God?

CarolinaHound wrote:Ok, if you had a choice between losing your child or believe in God, could you honestly do it? Could you "honestly" lose your faith, beyond any shadow of doubt that there is no God?

I would abandon my faith and my following of anything to save my child.

No question.

You'd still have no doubt in your mind that there is a God? You'd embrace religion and never mention or think of it as being a cult and not be lying about it?

I'd wrap the special cancer curing recipe in C4 and put it in an undisclosed location. Then I would tell the world that I will supply them with the cure as long as no one attacks me because as soon as someone did I would blow up the secret recipe and no one would get it Ha, Ha, Ha (evil scientist like laugh).

Cartoon Head wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:

Cartoon Head wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:As long as part of the deal was my country would be the only one the cure was given to, and it was administered throughout the world by us.

Is it just me, or does that not contradict?

You seem to be saying you'd want it kept purely for people of your country, then something about your country doing something around the world?

Can you explain, please?

Thanks

Well, since we would have no military to defend ourselves with, our only protection would be the knowledge of how to make the cure. A safeguard from attack is what I was meaning. I wouldn't keep it from the world, but I wouldn't allow the world to know how to reproduce it. Sort of like if we were on the playground and you wanted to play ball but the ball was mine, if you want to play with my ball you best be nice to me.

Gotcha!

Okay, here is one to muse over.

If you HAD to abandon one, in all aspects, would it be your wife/partner, or your religion?

LOL that's easy. My religion.

CarolinaHound wrote:You'd still have no doubt in your mind that there is a God? You'd embrace religion and never mention or think of it as being a cult and not be lying about it?

Sorry, I think we are speaking at crossed purposes here!

Cartoon Head wrote:
If you HAD to abandon one, in all aspects, would it be your wife/partner, or your religion?

I have neither of any so I have nothing to lose.

Cartoon Head wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:You'd still have no doubt in your mind that there is a God? You'd embrace religion and never mention or think of it as being a cult and not be lying about it?

Sorry, I think we are speaking at crossed purposes here!

Could be.

The answer to thread CH started is simple.

I would say no. Why? Well because no nation would willingly give up their military. Regardless of the cure for the cancer. Agreeing to this would spell death for thousands of people, and the subjugation of said country. This to me as a leader of a country this would be seen as a threat. I would say no I do not agree to your offer. We have very good scientist's working on this problem now. We will find a cure. It may not be as soon as we would like. but we are working on it. We will find our own way. If you have the cure fine, we will find one at some point. I will not agree to your offer.

Theophilus wrote:The answer to thread CH started is simple.

I would say no. Why? Well because no nation would willingly give up their military. Regardless of the cure for the cancer. Agreeing to this would spell death for thousands of people, and the subjugation of said country. This to me as a leader of a country this would be seen as a threat. I would say no I do not agree to your offer. We have very good scientist's working on this problem now. We will find a cure. It may not be as soon as we would like. but we are working on it. We will find our own way. If you have the cure fine, we will find one at some point. I will not agree to your offer.

What he said

Theophilus wrote:The answer to thread CH started is simple.

I would say no. Why? Well because no nation would willingly give up their military. Regardless of the cure for the cancer. Agreeing to this would spell death for thousands of people, and the subjugation of said country. This to me as a leader of a country this would be seen as a threat. I would say no I do not agree to your offer. We have very good scientist's working on this problem now. We will find a cure. It may not be as soon as we would like. but we are working on it. We will find our own way. If you have the cure fine, we will find one at some point. I will not agree to your offer.

Costa Rica

Sir Bonvolio wrote:

Theophilus wrote:The answer to thread CH started is simple.

I would say no. Why? Well because no nation would willingly give up their military. Regardless of the cure for the cancer. Agreeing to this would spell death for thousands of people, and the subjugation of said country. This to me as a leader of a country this would be seen as a threat. I would say no I do not agree to your offer. We have very good scientist's working on this problem now. We will find a cure. It may not be as soon as we would like. but we are working on it. We will find our own way. If you have the cure fine, we will find one at some point. I will not agree to your offer.

Costa Rica

Could you please expand your comments. I am most curious. Also at times I am not the sharpest guy around. That being said I would really like to see further explanation. Thanks from a guy who likes to learn.

Theophilus wrote:

Sir Bonvolio wrote:

Theophilus wrote:The answer to thread CH started is simple.

I would say no. Why? Well because no nation would willingly give up their military. Regardless of the cure for the cancer. Agreeing to this would spell death for thousands of people, and the subjugation of said country. This to me as a leader of a country this would be seen as a threat. I would say no I do not agree to your offer. We have very good scientist's working on this problem now. We will find a cure. It may not be as soon as we would like. but we are working on it. We will find our own way. If you have the cure fine, we will find one at some point. I will not agree to your offer.

Costa Rica

Could you please expand your comments. I am most curious. Also at times I am not the sharpest guy around. That being said I would really like to see further explanation. Thanks from a guy who likes to learn.

Gladly.

On December 1, 1948, President José Figueres Ferrer of Costa Rica abolished the country's army after victory in the civil war in that year. In a ceremony in the Cuartel Bellavista, Figueres broke a wall with a mallet symbolizing the end of Costa Rica's military spirit. In 1949, the abolition of the military was introduced in Article 12 of the Costa Rican Constitution.


José Figueres Ferrer breaking a wall of the Cuartel Bellavista symbolizing the abolition of the Military.The budget previously dedicated to the military now is dedicated to security, education and culture; the country maintains Police Guard forces. The museum Museo Nacional de Costa Rica was placed in the Cuartel Bellavista as a symbol of commitment to culture.

In 1986, President Oscar Arias Sánchez declared December 1 as the Día de la Abolición del Ejército (Military abolition day) with Law #8115.

Costa Rica has no army. They still have an internal security force to protect from attackers et al, but my understanding is that they are more like a police force.

If I were being cynical, I would say this;

"I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it." - John Handey

Sir Bonvolio wrote:

Theophilus wrote:

Sir Bonvolio wrote:

Theophilus wrote:The answer to thread CH started is simple.

I would say no. Why? Well because no nation would willingly give up their military. Regardless of the cure for the cancer. Agreeing to this would spell death for thousands of people, and the subjugation of said country. This to me as a leader of a country this would be seen as a threat. I would say no I do not agree to your offer. We have very good scientist's working on this problem now. We will find a cure. It may not be as soon as we would like. but we are working on it. We will find our own way. If you have the cure fine, we will find one at some point. I will not agree to your offer.

Costa Rica

Could you please expand your comments. I am most curious. Also at times I am not the sharpest guy around. That being said I would really like to see further explanation. Thanks from a guy who likes to learn.

Gladly.

On December 1, 1948, President José Figueres Ferrer of Costa Rica abolished the country's army after victory in the civil war in that year. In a ceremony in the Cuartel Bellavista, Figueres broke a wall with a mallet symbolizing the end of Costa Rica's military spirit. In 1949, the abolition of the military was introduced in Article 12 of the Costa Rican Constitution.


José Figueres Ferrer breaking a wall of the Cuartel Bellavista symbolizing the abolition of the Military.The budget previously dedicated to the military now is dedicated to security, education and culture; the country maintains Police Guard forces. The museum Museo Nacional de Costa Rica was placed in the Cuartel Bellavista as a symbol of commitment to culture.

In 1986, President Oscar Arias Sánchez declared December 1 as the Día de la Abolición del Ejército (Military abolition day) with Law #8115.

Costa Rica has no army. They still have an internal security force to protect from attackers et al, but my understanding is that they are more like a police force.

If I were being cynical, I would say this;

"I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it." - John Handey

I find this very interesting. Thanks for that. I will have to research more on this.

A word without war, a world without hate. Hmmmmnnn. How can this happen? Well when people have money in their pocket. People seem to be real nice. So how to make that happen. Wish I knew. We all throughout the world are in difficult times. Also I would like to comment on the the John Handley quote. It is not that they did not expect it. It is that they would just hope the problem would go away. It is never that we did not expect it. It is we thought it would go away.

Theophilus wrote:

Sir Bonvolio wrote:

Theophilus wrote:

Sir Bonvolio wrote:

Theophilus wrote:The answer to thread CH started is simple.

I would say no. Why? Well because no nation would willingly give up their military. Regardless of the cure for the cancer. Agreeing to this would spell death for thousands of people, and the subjugation of said country. This to me as a leader of a country this would be seen as a threat. I would say no I do not agree to your offer. We have very good scientist's working on this problem now. We will find a cure. It may not be as soon as we would like. but we are working on it. We will find our own way. If you have the cure fine, we will find one at some point. I will not agree to your offer.

Costa Rica

Could you please expand your comments. I am most curious. Also at times I am not the sharpest guy around. That being said I would really like to see further explanation. Thanks from a guy who likes to learn.

Gladly.

On December 1, 1948, President José Figueres Ferrer of Costa Rica abolished the country's army after victory in the civil war in that year. In a ceremony in the Cuartel Bellavista, Figueres broke a wall with a mallet symbolizing the end of Costa Rica's military spirit. In 1949, the abolition of the military was introduced in Article 12 of the Costa Rican Constitution.


José Figueres Ferrer breaking a wall of the Cuartel Bellavista symbolizing the abolition of the Military.The budget previously dedicated to the military now is dedicated to security, education and culture; the country maintains Police Guard forces. The museum Museo Nacional de Costa Rica was placed in the Cuartel Bellavista as a symbol of commitment to culture.

In 1986, President Oscar Arias Sánchez declared December 1 as the Día de la Abolición del Ejército (Military abolition day) with Law #8115.

Costa Rica has no army. They still have an internal security force to protect from attackers et al, but my understanding is that they are more like a police force.

If I were being cynical, I would say this;

"I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it." - John Handey

I find this very interesting. Thanks for that. I will have to research more on this.

A word without war, a world without hate. Hmmmmnnn. How can this happen? Well when people have money in their pocket. People seem to be real nice. So how to make that happen. Wish I knew. We all throughout the world are in difficult times. Also I would like to comment on the the John Handley quote. It is not that they did not expect it. It is that they would just hope the problem would go away. It is never that we did not expect it. It is we thought it would go away.

This is true, greed has alot to do with it. There are always people that want more than their fair share, the rest of us suffer for it.

"If a dollar were a chicken, would a chicken be evil" - Samuel L. Jackson