What Would You Do...?

[Synonym]

I think it could be justified to use the dynamite as she )or the baby) is threatening their lives.

If it is justifiable for a pregnant woman to terminate to save her own life then why cannot others when that foetus is threatening theirs by blocking the exit.

[Deleted]

The woman should really have known better than to get stuck; as the leader, she is responsible for the welfare of the group.
Presumably some strong guys have already taken hold of her legs and given her a good tug?
OK, then, the dynamite it is.

[sadie1263]

Wow.....that's a tough one. I would think that using the dynamite would be the only answer.......I'm just not sure I could light the fuse.

[Deleted]

There would be alternative ways of getting her out of there, they could use something for lubrication to slide her out? the mind boggles, well mine does!

[Deleted]

My mind was boggling too - on the lines of "reduce the bulk". But in the absence of a qualified gynaecologist, and with the water rushing in.......

[Hunny]

I say, since there's a whole 'group' of people, they need to grab onto her legs and pull her back in even if they have to hurt her severely, get it done! Then the group can leave and she can get back in the opening.

[Synonym]

I think the purposes of questions such as these are to test moral intuitions in specific circumstances where it is either death of two or the death of the many, or some other restricted set of choices.

We should assume for them that all other possibilities have been exhausted or there is no time. After all, you could reason that they could pull, or you could posit that Batman turns up to save the day, but this will not tell us anything about your moral intuitions in the specific circumstance of two versus many and you can either act to kill two or do nothing and all die, and you have to decide one way or another.

[Hunny]

Ah. Well then we must blow her up!

[Hunny]

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

What Would You Do...?

Every Monday, a new dilemma to sort out -

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////



Drug Bust

You are on holiday in Bali with your 18 year old son and wife/husband. You have been there for a week and are ready to head home. All three of you are at the airport getting ready to board your plane, when an armed officer comes around with a sniffer dog. You have all your bags on a trolley, and the dog sniffs at both your wife/husband and your bag, and passes over it, however when he gets to your sons bag, he begins to get a bit more active. You look over at your son and he’s looking a little nervous. You know he’s smoked a little marijuana in his time, but generally, he’s a good kid, and you certainly didn’t think he’d actually be stupid enough to bring it back on the plane with him. At first you feel angry that he would do such a thing and start planning your responsibility lecture, but then you realize that you are in Bali, and they have a zero tolerance policy on drugs, meaning your son could be jailed for life, or worse, executed, if he does have some illicit materials in his bag. You look at your wife/husband and realize she has come to the same conclusion and has gone pale with fear. The armed officer accompanying the dog is beginning to look more stern with every sniff the dog takes and looks directly at you and asks you to open to the bag. You do, and as the officer begins to take things out of the bag, you see to your horror that there is a small quantity of marijuana stashed in with your sons belongings. The officer looks at you and asks “Who’s bag is this?” You realize you have to answer, but the answer won’t be easy. You see your wife/husband in the corner of your eye, and (s)he is about to step forward and claim it as their own; what do you say?

[Deleted]

easy,let the husband take the rap!

[Deleted]

Do what most wives and mothers would do in a situation like that - make out it's theirs!

[Deleted]

I wouldn't claim it as mine - but then I'm not a mother. I think I would hope for some other explanation to let us all off the hook; could it have been planted by someone else while the bag was unattended?

Probably, I would refuse to answer at all, and hope the other two did the same. We might all get locked up, of course!

[Hunny]

I'd have to claim it as mine. I sure wouldnt want to, but I would be morally compelled to stand in harms way for the safety of my offspring.

[Deleted]

The guards won't take long to twig that the bag belongs to a teenage boy, surely?

[Hunny]

Jan 1, 2013 19:05:57 GMT @skylark said:

The guards won't take long to twig that the bag belongs to a teenage boy, surely?

Well you could look ashamed and say you'd put it in there hoping they wouldn't look so much at a child's bag...

[Deleted]

Yes, that's what I'd do, Hunny.

I think most Mums feel an instinctive desire to protect our kids.

[Big Lin]

I'd do the same if necessary but I'd hope my husband would beat me to it!

[Deleted]

He isn't a child, though - he is 18 and a far more likely suspect than his (probably) middle-aged parents. Had he been younger I would have urged him to say nothing and wait for us to find him a lawyer - indeed that might be the best policy anyway; I could do more to help him if I stayed out of jail.

[Deleted]

It also sounds as though the bag was unlocked, because I was asked to open it. Why would I have my son's key?
Better to find some possible defence than any one of us admit anything.

[sadie1263]

Wow...that's a nasty one........I believe the cops are going to figure out pretty quick what is going on......definitely going to be identified as the kids bag.........I would probably step forward and argue to the death over the fact it was mine.........but I'm torn by the fact that I would be livid at my child who should know better and have to deal with the consequences of his choices too......

[Hunny]

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

What Would You Do...?

Every Monday, a new dilemma to sort out -

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////



A Callous Passerby

Roger Smith, a quite competent swimmer, is out for a leisurely stroll. During the course of his walk he passes by a deserted pier from which a teenage boy who apparently cannot swim has fallen into the water. The boy is screaming for help. Smith recognizes that there is absolutely no danger to himself if he jumps in to save the boy; he could easily succeed if he tried. Nevertheless, he chooses to ignore the boy's cries. The water is cold and he is afraid of catching a cold -- he doesn't want to get his good clothes wet either. "Why should I inconvenience myself for this kid," Smith says to himself, and passes on. Does Smith have a moral obligation to save the boy? If so, should he have a legal obligation ["Good Samaritan" laws] as well?[/color]

[Deleted]

He's obviously got a MORAL obligation.

I'm not sure about the law; governments haven't had a good track record of trying to make people virtuous by passing legislation.

So yes to the moral quesiton and maybe to the legal one.

[Deleted]

Obviously a moral one. The law in England is that he has no legal obligation, but there is talk of changing that. The situation is that if the child drowns because he does nothing, he is in the clear. However if makes a mistake when trying to rescue him so that the child dies, he could be sued for negligence. Daft, eh?

[Big Lin]

Yes, it is daft, Skylark.

I guess it's a moral obligation for sure but legally - I don't know.

[sadie1263]

Don't believe he can be held liable by law......but I would hope he would be tarred and feathered by the townspeople.