Poll: The Most Morally Ambiguous Choice I've Ever Seen

[TheDrunkNinja]

I just saw a movie that was incredibly good. At one point, a scene in the movie started getting me thinking about the moral quandary that a father went through. Really, this might have been the most morally ambiguous choice I have ever seen, to the point where it really comes down to what type of person you are.

Spoiler

You are the father of a child, and together you are fleeing your country during a time of war. You are in a caravan with a few other people running for the border, two being a woman and her baby. The truck stops and a single armed border guard who is a soldier for the army attacking your country opens the back of the truck to find the group. The guard says he will only allow the truck to pass if he can have 10 minutes with the woman. A man who might be her husband, though you aren't sure, protests but stops when the guard points his rifle at him. It's clear the guard wouldn't want his superiors to find out about this, but really, you have no idea what he might do if you stood up. He is clearly very paranoid as you look at him.

Now, you can either defend her and say you will not allow this to happen, risking your own life for her, or you can stay quiet and allow the man to rape her for your own safe passage. What is the right thing to do? Now, keep in mind, you are a father. If you die, your son will be left alone. Is it right to stand up for the woman and risk leaving your son alone during this time of war, or is it right to stick with your responsibilities to your own family and let this horror befall the poor woman and her family?

Keep in mind, my question isn't what's the smart thing to do, but rather the right thing to do.

For those interested, the movie is:

Spoiler

The Kite Runner. Seriously, go rent this movie. It's one of the best movies I've ever seen.

 

[wooty]

Sorry, im a little confused, is the woman your wife or someone else's, because if its someone elses it should be his responsibility to protect her himself

 

[TheDrunkNinja]

Sorry, im a little confused, is the woman your wife or someone else's, because if its someone elses it should be his responsibility to protect her himself

Yea, I know. But that's what happened in the movie. Here, I'll change it so she's on her own.

 

[Radeonx]

I'd let it happen, especially since she isn't my wife.

 

[Trivun]

If the woman didn't have her husband there then I'd allow her to be raped, but only because if I was killed there'd be noone to defend her and she'd only end up raped anyway. Either way, she'd lose. So, only under those circumstances, would I do that.

In the actual event, however, her husband is also there. Hence I would stand up for the woman and defend her, because at least I'd have support from her husband, and if I died then the family would hopefully raise my son for me, so my fatherly duties would merely be passed on. That's the most honourable way I can think of to handle this situation, given the circumstances.

 

[TheDrunkNinja]

Let him fuck the *****. I thought the choice was pretty obvious.

Heh, yea, I'd probably do the same. But really, the question is what is the right thing to do.

 

[TheDrunkNinja]

Edit: My bad

 

[Jharry5]

I'd have to say that family comes first, so my son would need me. If the woman isn't anything to do with me, I would let it happen. It'd be a horrible weight on my mind, but the kid would come first. Who'd look after him if I tried to stand up for the woman? The soldier would most likely kill me, then rape the woman any way. Then I'd have left my son an orphan for nothing.

There wasn't really much of a choice for me, to be honest...

 

[tiredinnuendo]

So, wait, I'm in a group of unarmed refugees, many of whom have children with them, and passage will be allowed to us if this one woman is assaulted, but allowed to live? And my other choice is to try to go up against the armed guards who would have no problem killing off the entire group in seconds? And we all have kids?

Sorry, but this seems pretty obvious to me. The lesser of two evils is clear here. And by the way, the choice of, "I may have been able to stop it," seems a bit wrong. I see no practical way to stop that sort of thing, or really accomplish anything other than having all of us die.

- J

 

[TheZapper]

I'd have to let it happen. The safety of my own family would come before the safety of others.

 

[Sirf]

It's one of the best movies I've ever seen.

My advise to you, if you really thought that the movie was good, is to read the novel. I don't usually read books. I received it as a gift and couldn't put it down. The best I've read. Way better than the movie.

 

[TheDrunkNinja]

So, wait, I'm in a group of unarmed refugees, many of whom have children with them, and passage will be allowed to us if this one woman is assaulted, but allowed to live? And my other choice is to try to go up against the armed guards who would have no problem killing off the entire group in seconds? And we all have kids?

Sorry, but this seems pretty obvious to me. The lesser of two evils is clear here. And by the way, the choice of, "I may have been able to stop it," seems a bit wrong. I see no practical way to stop that sort of thing, or really accomplish anything other than having all of us die.

- J

The point is it's one guard who doesn't want his superiors to know about this. Creating a commotion might attract the other guards, and if he knows this, maybe he'll back down. Or, maybe not. This ain't the smart thing to do, but the right thing to do.

I must have worded this wrong or something.

 

[StarStruckStrumpets]

My son would be more important than some woman.
Call me heartless, but she is no concern of mine.

 

[Radeonx]

So, wait, I'm in a group of unarmed refugees, many of whom have children with them, and passage will be allowed to us if this one woman is assaulted, but allowed to live? And my other choice is to try to go up against the armed guards who would have no problem killing off the entire group in seconds? And we all have kids?

Sorry, but this seems pretty obvious to me. The lesser of two evils is clear here. And by the way, the choice of, "I may have been able to stop it," seems a bit wrong. I see no practical way to stop that sort of thing, or really accomplish anything other than having all of us die.

- J

The point is it's one guard who doesn't want his superiors to know about this. Creating a commotion might attract the other guards, and if he knows this, maybe he'll back down. Or, maybe not. This ain't the smart thing to do, but the right thing to do.

I must have worded this wrong or something.

Who decides what's right and wrong in this situation?
I think it is right to let her be raped, because, I'll probably end up dying.
And she'll live. So, she lives, and gets assaulted, and I still get to father my kid.
Right and wrong is in the eye of the beholder, so saying one thing is right can be completely false for someone else.

 

[GoldenCondor]

He'd kill you and end up raping the woman anyway. Just let him have a go.

 

[Disaster Button]

There could actually be other alternatives, like ask her if she objected. Or let the others defend her, or have everoyne just jump the guard and beat his face.

But how youre asking the smart/right thing would be to let the guard take a spin, the deffinite right thing would be to defend the woman.