Where did I attack your character?
Become a parent. Then we’ll talk.
If everybody would agree to behave certain way, a lot of problems would be solved. E.g. we would be living in a communism where everybody provides the work they can and take just what they need. For some odd reasons this does not work, even if it would be nice.
Your premise is idealistic and nice in principle but ultimately without a chance to work out in practice. How familiar are you with the behavior of people? Or even animals, when it comes to protection of their offsprings?
Right there. I’m not a parent so my opinion on murder is somehow less valid.
That is called an Ad Hominem attack.
I reject the notion that I am unqualified to comment on genocide simply because I don’t have children. I have family, I have people I am emotionally invested in. Your personal experience of love for you child does not elevate your authority on topics of morality.
If anything this conversation seems to indicate that the chemical bond you have with your child has compromised your capacity to reason when it comes to acts of violence. And sadly you are proud of it.
11 Likes
That kind of bond evolved in that way for a reason. Including the suspension of logics.
Is it pride, or a biologically encoded grim determination?
2 Likes
What if they were trading arms for hostages?
1 Like
Either way I aim to transcend it.
I don’t want to perpetuate violence.
1 Like
Yes, dismiss me as naive. I couldn’t possibly mean what I say.
Insulate yourself from the logical extension of your position. Tell yourself whatever you need to in order to distance yourself from the violent outcomes that go along with your world views.
You aren’t sickeningly comfortable with horrendous acts so long as it’s in the name of a biological imperative.
It’s your critic who is deficient. After all no reasonable adult could possibly be unwilling to support terrorism if it meant the potential rescue of their child. There is simply no way a person could exercise the self-control needed to not participate in barbarism under such circumstances.
6 Likes
Do not feed troll.
3 Likes
By the same token paying a ransom is really bad for other hostages and potential hostages but that doesn’t justify this sort of fuck you delivered to a citizen you supposedly serve.
Truly a no-win situation, but the footer under this story reading:
MORE WONDERFUL THINGS
seems particularly… er… inapposite…
1 Like
@colinInSpace, what if ISIS assured you that they would stop killing the Yazidi people if, in exchange, you agreed to torture and kill @shaddack. Would you do it?
If you knew that fueling your car or using oil-powered transportation funds v/a terrorist organizations across the globe, would you stop using it?
How far are you willing to go re: that utilitarian outlook?
2 Likes
I’m a bit confused with the absolute statement that a parent will do anything to save the life of their child. Clearly, the Foley family did not pay the ransom despite the risk of jail-time. The article itself is about a counter-example to that statement.
Personally, while I’d be thanking my lucky stars if my parents paid my ransom and I did in fact return home alive, I’d still be a little horrified and feel more than a little guilt at indirectly aiding terrorists in mass murder.
8 Likes
Prisoner Exchange Scheme : Give them George Bush in return for James Foley, and Tony Blair for David Haines.
12 Likes
Given the nature of ISIL and similar terrorist organizations, I doubt they would keep their word.
As for how far I am capable of extending my utilitarianism, I’m not sure.
It’s easy enough to avoid active participation in activities with harmful consequences, but passive activities are another matter.
Are you familiar with the Trolley Problem?
I find it really challenges my otherwise utilitarian outlook.
To commute to my job I do drive a car, no doubt my nations thirst for oil indirectly contribute to the death of innocents in area embroiled in oil related conflicts,
I have a smartphone, some computers, and other electronics. No doubt some of the components were manufactured and will eventually be disposed of in places where they will contribute to the death of some people.
I’m not perfect, many of my passive behaviors contribute to various cumulative effects which cause suffering.
Although I do make an effort to offset that:
-I try to avoid driving whenever possible, preferring my bike.
-I volunteer with FreeGeek an organization that attempts to recycle hazardous electronics locally so as not to export our e-waste abroad.
I’m sure there are many other activities in my life which inadvertently contribute to the suffering and deaths of others. It’s not something I’m happy about, and I do try to avoid contributing when I can.
I know for sure I want to abstain from activities which actively contribute to pain and death. Pain & death through inactivity feels different psychologically and I can’t quite put my finger on why.
4 Likes
This is exactly it. It would go something like this, for me: “Screw you US government trollies and your, “don’t pay them or we’ll arrest you.” FINE. Arrest me. I am getting my son back, hell or high water you bastards. You didn’t do your job. After we get him back I’m filing civil suit to recover the money from your bloated military budget. That, and I’m running for Congress and I’m going to spend the next 20 years trying to defund your section, as well as seeking courts martial against you, and demotion, and I will succeed. You just picked a fight with the wrong dad.”
5 Likes
Well said. I’m horrified that the family feels this way. They could probably figure out the reality of the situation (that paying would be material support of fuck-all evil), but if the message needed to be delivered, it could have been done with a 100x dose of compassion and empathy. Horrible situation.
4 Likes
Meanwhile, the tortures of your son are now financed to do the same thing 100 times over. Your money would inflict that pain on 100 other families. Would you still do it? I am a father and I ask that question.
2 Likes
It would be great if everyone could hold onto these ideals when faced with agonizing, horrible, no-win scenarios but ultimately consistency and logic go straight out the window when the protection of your children comes into play.
As a parent, such a decision is an absolute no-brainer - yes, I would directly fund the murder of innocents if it meant the life of my children were held in the balance. And I would not even think twice about it.
Call me a selfish bastard but my conscience would be clean.
I admire your idealism and genuinely wish that it never has to be tested in a situation like this.
5 Likes
Would you fund putting many other families through the same situation? I ask honestly, I feel the same way about my children, but the reality is that money buys misery.
1 Like
I’d raise twice as much and hunt those fuckers down when I wasn’t busy with the general.
1 Like
