Is it ever a good thing to knowingly, purposely cause the death of a viable, healthy six-month old infant?
Is it ever a moral thing?
Seven people have been on the run from a band of Nazi soldiers, intent on hunting them down and killing four within the group.
The four in question are responsible for the construction and ongoing maintenance of relaying vital information to the Allies from inside the German interior.
Two men, two women, with the each of the men married to either woman.
The other three are the children of the second couple: two adolescents and one six-month old infant.
After some cat-and-mouse chasing, the Nazi's have unknowingly trapped the seven in the basement of a house they have temporarily appropriated, which necessitates the absolute silence on the part of the seven.
Any sound from the basement will surely initiate a search by the soldiers, which would guarantee the death of all seven people.
The baby starts to cry.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHFor an answer, watch the final episode of MASH.
Is it ever a good thing to knowingly, purposely cause the death of a viable, healthy six-month old infant?
Is it ever a moral thing?
Seven people have been on the run from a band of Nazi soldiers, intent on hunting them down and killing four within the group.
The four in question are responsible for the construction and ongoing maintenance of relayi ...[text shortened]... by the soldiers, which would guarantee the death of all seven people.
The baby starts to cry.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWhat if the baby was going to grow up and find a cure for Alzheimer's and or cancers?
Is it ever a good thing to knowingly, purposely cause the death of a viable, healthy six-month old infant?
Is it ever a moral thing?
Seven people have been on the run from a band of Nazi soldiers, intent on hunting them down and killing four within the group.
The four in question are responsible for the construction and ongoing maintenance of relayi ...[text shortened]... by the soldiers, which would guarantee the death of all seven people.
The baby starts to cry.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHMorality questions where the death of one individual may save the lives of other individuals are always tricky. I think that one must handle such cases on a case by case basis.
Is it ever a good thing to knowingly, purposely cause the death of a viable, healthy six-month old infant?
I am not sure about morally good, but morally excusable? Maybe. If someones actions have a significant chance of causing my imminent death I think it is morally excusable for me to kill them. Whether I would do so or not is another matter - and I think I would have to be faced with the situation to find out.
Originally posted by twhiteheadYou're the father of the six month infant here.
Morality questions where the death of one individual may save the lives of other individuals are always tricky. I think that one must handle such cases on a case by case basis.
I am not sure about morally good, but morally excusable? Maybe. If someones actions have a significant chance of causing my imminent death I think it is morally excusable for me t ...[text shortened]... or not is another matter - and I think I would have to be faced with the situation to find out.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHLegend is that Native American women used to cover the mouths of their infants to avoid detection. Those men were able to endure great pain without making a sound later.
Is it ever a good thing to knowingly, purposely cause the death of a viable, healthy six-month old infant?
Is it ever a moral thing?
Seven people have been on the run from a band of Nazi soldiers, intent on hunting them down and killing four within the group.
The four in question are responsible for the construction and ongoing maintenance of relayi ...[text shortened]... by the soldiers, which would guarantee the death of all seven people.
The baby starts to cry.
Whether this is true, or just wishful thinking on the part of frustrated parents of infants, the point remains that you try every other viable option before resorting to killing.
I'm not going to say that it can never be justified, because, as twhitehead said, every case must be evaluated individually. I am not comfortable imposing hard and fast rules on people in difficult situations like this.
Originally posted by twhiteheadJust like Jesus death.
Morality questions where the death of one individual may save the lives of other individuals are always tricky. I think that one must handle such cases on a case by case basis.
I am not sure about morally good, but morally excusable? Maybe. If someones actions have a significant chance of causing my imminent death I think it is morally excusable for me t ...[text shortened]... or not is another matter - and I think I would have to be faced with the situation to find out.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHOne factor that might play a role here is whether or not you consider a six month old a full human being. In some cultures with high infant mortality, children are not named before their first birthday in an effort to reduce the morning should the infant die. Whether such cultures consider it less of a crime to kill a child prior to naming it I am not sure. I know many modern societies consider a child a human from the moment of birth and disagree about its status prior to birth.
You're the father of the six month infant here.
An interesting twist to moral situations like this is to look at how your decision changes depending on who does the killing.
Suppose the baby was left out in the open. You are given a choice, leave the baby there and the Nazi's will kill it when they find it, but not harm you and your companions. Or go out and claim ownership of the baby, in which case the Nazi's will kill you and your companions but not harm the Baby. Does your decision change now that it is the Nazi's that kill the Baby not you?