Poll: Is a Childs Life more Valuable then a Adults ?

[MiracleOfSound]

The child, unless it's ginger.

Disclaimer: I'm joking, of course. I have lots of ginger friends and relatives and even know one hot ginger girl

That one off of the Guild?

OT: Neither, they either both live, both die, or fight it out in an epic duel.

What's the Guild?

 

[Uncreation]

Yeah, every single one of you "morally immune" tough guys is a stinking liar. You wouldn't shoot a child, not even if it was the logical choice. Stop kidding yourselves.

Simply out of a sense of humanity, you'd spare the child and shoot the adult. If the adult has any sense of decency he'll probably agree. It would still be hard to kill the adult, I can't imagine what it's like to know that you're the cause of someone's death.

Let's not make any presumptions about what other people would or would not do, okay. Personally i wouldn't shoot either of them.

Also: Whoo, 100th post! I guess.

 

[Cpt. Red]

Just because I can I'm going to remove most morality out of it and look at this from a purely selfish perspective.

In your example the adult would be the one to die as generally the public, and the police, gets more agitated by people murdering kids and if the kid dies they will generally peruse it's killer longer then if the adult is shot. Also kids aren't equally good at being a witness then adults.

But if I thought I had a decent chance at framing the adult for the murder then the kid would die.

Now if it were regular me then I would do mostly anything to avoid making the choice including killing myself instead. Even though that would actually be a selfish act as I don't think I could live knowing I killed an innocent man/woman.

 

[00exmachina]

As they say people are not oranges.
So I'm declining to vote.

 

[AvsJoe]

Geez, I have no idea. This is a good question. I will say that if I could only save one life I'd go with the child 90% of the time.

 

[RamirezDoEverything]

yes, only because Adults have lived longer, and I belive a child has so much more potential and an adult has lived his/her life.

But if it's 14 year old Jamal smoking weed, then things are different....

 

[HentMas]

as a whole, i think the child haves more potential to become some one amazing, while the adult may or may not be worty of the life he haves but one haves to think that the child, given propper care and education can always out do the grown man

so yes, the life of a kid is more worty than the life of a man, (in my oppinion)

but not worth more than the life of a woman?

interesting...

dear gods no!!

who would pick a woman over a man or a child??

its blasphemy!! unless of course you are in need of a housekeeper, a cook, a laid or a maid why would you botter with a woman?? /SARCASM

my sincere apologies, i meant to say a childs life is more worthy than a grown up.

 

[Mozared]

It dep....

DAMN YOU.

Alright then - I don't think either is 'more valuable'. You can't really compare the two. 'For society', you'd have to do some serious resource to find out which has more worth. 'For... eternity?', there is no answer. It's kind of like dividing by zero - not 0, not 1, but an impossible answer.

 

[Cody211282]

If I'm holding the gun and have to pick someone why cant I pick me? Both of them gwt to walk away from it and I don't have to live with murdering someone.

 

[SextusMaximus]

The child, unless it's ginger.

Disclaimer: I'm joking, of course. I have lots of ginger friends and relatives and even know one hot ginger girl

That one off of the Guild?

OT: Neither, they either both live, both die, or fight it out in an epic duel.

What's the Guild?

It's an internet webseries, I was getting at the fact that the main character is ginger. And HOT.

 

[Schlagwerk]

My first impulse is "no". I'm not sure what to back that up with, given the "children are innocent" standpoint.

 

[Caligulove]

Depends on the situation. Theres the matter of potential and then theres the immediate.

Depends on what you value.

 

[Matt-Allan-ca]

If it was an option then I would kill myself (but it's not so can people stop saying that).

You people make me feel sick, the fact that you all cast away values like morality, humanity and integrity and then change what it has meant to be human for so long is rediculous.

I expected a few people to make the "they are both just people" argument and even just say they "hate kids" (you must be kidding yourself to actually have that as an argument, you might as well be saying I eat baby heads). It's a hard argument to fight because it's like talking to a fucking statistics board. It's unethical, because you take away the value assigned to the childs life by not considering what makes us human and as for the "hate kids" argument, all I have to say is that what if someone had that idea about you, something happened and you never got a chance to grow up into what you are now, of course I'm sure you wouldn't want to die, but this is what society has formed and the current obnoxious, rude generation of children are only a result of people like you, people who don't embrace children.

Children are the most precious thing in the world and when I hear about the rape and death that they have to suffer through, it tears me up inside. I help out in a non-profit organisation that deals with children who have had tough lives and it's horrific what some of these kids have dealt with. In my own opinion they are so innocent that I would put myself through the worst death imaginable 100 times over.

Stop being so robotic and cutting out a crucial part of your actual opinion, "fuck morality" my ass, if you actually came to that opinion than ok I'll pretend to roll with it (fucking axe murderer)

Thank you to the few people who said they "couldn't make a decision like that".

(If there are people on this forum that truly believe the opposite opinion then fuck you, moderators ban me now)

Apologies for all spelling and grammar mistakes.

 

[Lightbulb830]

I believe this goes on a case by case kind of situation. If the child has alot of potiental or is the "key to humanity", and the adult is Nicolas Cage... Well... that would make the child Nicolas Cage also... then, the child should be allowed to live and the adult should give his (or her) live for the child. However, if the child is spoiled or evil, which everyone sees, however the adult is a super hero, i.e. Superman, and truly wants to give his life for the child, but we are the group that is deciding, then I feel that the adult should live. It all is the timing of the situation.

to go back to your situation, I think that I would either put the gun down, shoot and miss, shoot myself, but most likely, shoot the adult, since our children can save the world.

 

[Chrono180]

If it was an option then I would kill myself (but it's not so can people stop saying that).

You people make me feel sick, the fact that you all cast away values like morality, humanity and integrity and then change what it has meant to be human for so long is rediculous.

I expected a few people to make the "they are both just people" argument and even just say they "hate kids" (you must be kidding yourself to actually have that as an argument, you might as well be saying I eat baby heads). It's a hard argument to fight because it's like talking to a fucking statistics board. It's unethical, because you take away the value assigned to the childs life by not considering what makes us human and as for the "hate kids" argument, all I have to say is that what if someone had that idea about you, something happened and you never got a chance to grow up into what you are now, of course I'm sure you wouldn't want to die, but this is what society has formed and the current obnoxious, rude generation of children are only a result of people like you, people who don't embrace children.

Children are the most precious thing in the world and when I hear about the rape and death that they have to suffer through, it tears me up inside. I help out in a non-profit organisation that deals with children who have had tough lives and it's horrific what some of these kids have dealt with. In my own opinion they are so innocent that I would put myself through the worst death imaginable 100 times over.

Stop being so robotic and cutting out a crucial part of your actual opinion, "fuck morality" my ass, if you actually came to that opinion than ok I'll pretend to roll with it (fucking axe murderer)

Thank you to the few people who said they "couldn't make a decision like that".

(If there are people on this forum that truly believe the opposite opinion then fuck you, moderators ban me now)

Apologies for all spelling and grammar mistakes.

Since when is innocence a good thing? As far as I can tell, it's basically a synonym for being naive, and people who are naive don't have the experience needed to be productive members of society. Now, they could become productive via training and experience, but most adults are already like that, and thus it would be better to save someone who is certainly productive than someone who might or might not be productive in a few years. A bird in the hand being worth two in the bush, if you will.

Also, remember that children are second class citizens in todays age. They can't work, can't express themselves, can't do much of anything really. This means that society as a whole has decided that a child is less important than a adult to the future. This isn't to say the kid isn't important at all, just that they are worth less.

Now, I may be an anomaly, but I for one would rather have never been born. I can honestly say that if I had a time machine, I would go back and kill myself as an infant. The ONLY reason I haven't killed myself yet is because I don't want to hurt my parents.

Also, I think the reason kids today are so rude and disrespectful is because it is no longer permissible for parents to hit them. Speaking as someone who was beaten on regular basis by my classmates, and whose abuse was endorsed by his parents, I can say that kids who suffer physical injuries seem, in my experience at least, to turn out better than kids whose parents can't keep them in line. If more parents beat their kids, I expect the kids would be far more respectful of adults.

And just so you know, I think most people honestly don't care about "right" or "wrong" they just care about what they can get away with.

 

[Matt-Allan-ca]

If it was an option then I would kill myself (but it's not so can people stop saying that).

You people make me feel sick, the fact that you all cast away values like morality, humanity and integrity and then change what it has meant to be human for so long is rediculous.

I expected a few people to make the "they are both just people" argument and even just say they "hate kids" (you must be kidding yourself to actually have that as an argument, you might as well be saying I eat baby heads). It's a hard argument to fight because it's like talking to a fucking statistics board. It's unethical, because you take away the value assigned to the childs life by not considering what makes us human and as for the "hate kids" argument, all I have to say is that what if someone had that idea about you, something happened and you never got a chance to grow up into what you are now, of course I'm sure you wouldn't want to die, but this is what society has formed and the current obnoxious, rude generation of children are only a result of people like you, people who don't embrace children.

Children are the most precious thing in the world and when I hear about the rape and death that they have to suffer through, it tears me up inside. I help out in a non-profit organisation that deals with children who have had tough lives and it's horrific what some of these kids have dealt with. In my own opinion they are so innocent that I would put myself through the worst death imaginable 100 times over.

Stop being so robotic and cutting out a crucial part of your actual opinion, "fuck morality" my ass, if you actually came to that opinion than ok I'll pretend to roll with it (fucking axe murderer)

Thank you to the few people who said they "couldn't make a decision like that".

(If there are people on this forum that truly believe the opposite opinion then fuck you, moderators ban me now)

Apologies for all spelling and grammar mistakes.

Since when is innocence a good thing? As far as I can tell, it's basically a synonym for being naive, and people who are naive don't have the experience needed to be productive members of society. Now, they could become productive via training and experience, but most adults are already like that, and thus it would be better to save someone who is certainly productive than someone who might or might not be productive in a few years. A bird in the hand being worth two in the bush, if you will.

Also, remember that children are second class citizens in todays age. They can't work, can't express themselves, can't do much of anything really. This means that society as a whole has decided that a child is less important than a adult to the future. This isn't to say the kid isn't important at all, just that they are worth less.

Now, I may be an anomaly, but I for one would rather have never been born. I can honestly say that if I had a time machine, I would go back and kill myself as an infant. The ONLY reason I haven't killed myself yet is because I don't want to hurt my parents.

Also, I think the reason kids today are so rude and disrespectful is because it is no longer permissible for parents to hit them. Speaking as someone who was beaten on regular basis by my classmates, and whose abuse was endorsed by his parents, I can say that kids who suffer physical injuries seem, in my experience at least, to turn out better than kids whose parents can't keep them in line. If more parents beat their kids, I expect the kids would be far more respectful of adults.

And just so you know, I think most people honestly don't care about "right" or "wrong" they just care about what they can get away with.

that's harsh dude, seriously thats one of the more honest "kill child" answers I've read, while other people look at it from a statistics only POV, it seems like you've truly been hurt by the world and have formed that decision because of it.

What you said about children being beaten and turning out better is not true, it is likely that the children who beat you were troubled by something and might have been getting beaten or raped every other afternoon (not condoning what they did to you), my father beat my brothers and one turned out pretentious, another a drunkard and the last an arsehole who doesn't want kids even though his wife repeatedly hints at it, my sister was raped (not by my father) and she ended up very angry at the world, I on the other hand was born a well behaved child and the love my mother showed me has sculpted me into what I am today.

"They can't work, can't express themselves, can't do much of anything really." (can't work? how about chores?) that is one very wrong perception of children and linking back to the beating children comment, you could punish so many different children in the same way and they would all turn out extremely different because each child responds differently to every punishment imaginable, so in my experience each child is more expressive than any adult I've ever met.

I once had a little 11 year old girl say I was "cool" because I use "feelings" and the other kids all agreed, I'm 16 and I think the display of emotions I represent, at quite a bit of an older age, will help them become functioning members of society. The children I talk about are some of the worst out of the batch and because I look at them uniquely and treat them as individuals they have a chance to become good people and thats where the challenge lies.

Every single person anyone meets in life has a responsibility to let that meeting be an enjoyable experience, if we don't than we make hatred a reality and if more people had this view, for children especially, than society (not just an angry dad and a depressed emotional mother) would make children functioning members of society.

I never said innocence was a good thing but innocence needs to be protected. If a so called productive member of society decides to allow a child to die (surely an inhumane act which Ghandi, Jesus and the likes would shake their heads at) than he isn't very good at functioning in a society based on the protection of women and children, so basically if a child isn't functioning than society isn't functioning anyway, especially if you throw away our societies values.

sorry if I worded this argument terribly, I am very tired.