(February 18, 2014 at 4:42 pm)paulpablo Wrote:

(February 18, 2014 at 3:49 pm)KUSA Wrote: There is one other thing to consider. The child would be yours and the fucktard that set this up would have possession of your child. That would be unacceptable to me.

That's a good point who would have possession of the child?

The psycho would. Who knows what he wants to do with it.

CD's response seems the most rational to me. The simplest way to look at it is, what action am I taking? I am either directly hurting a person or I am not. It is only my choice to harm the young girl in the room with me, NOT the loved one who is at the mercy of the villain. It is in fact his choice to harm my loved one if I refuse to harm the girl. In that case the choice is easy; I would not rape the young girl. Were our positions reversed, I can imagine that I would be extremely disturbed at the thought that someone violated a child just to spare me from torture.

Or to put it another way, what if you were on that end of it and afterwards you had to face that child and explain why it was better you than him/her?

(February 18, 2014 at 5:10 pm)Tonus Wrote: CD's response seems the most rational to me. The simplest way to look at it is, what action am I taking? I am either directly hurting a person or I am not. It is only my choice to harm the young girl in the room with me, NOT the loved one who is at the mercy of the villain. It is in fact his choice to harm my loved one if I refuse to harm the girl. In that case the choice is easy; I would not rape the young girl. Were our positions reversed, I can imagine that I would be extremely disturbed at the thought that someone violated a child just to spare me from torture.

Not only that, but by raping and impregnating the child, you are now directly responsible for putting an infant (YOUR child) into the hands of a psychopath.

Saving your loved one is the most selfish, least moral choice.

(February 18, 2014 at 5:40 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(February 18, 2014 at 5:10 pm)Tonus Wrote: CD's response seems the most rational to me. The simplest way to look at it is, what action am I taking? I am either directly hurting a person or I am not. It is only my choice to harm the young girl in the room with me, NOT the loved one who is at the mercy of the villain. It is in fact his choice to harm my loved one if I refuse to harm the girl. In that case the choice is easy; I would not rape the young girl. Were our positions reversed, I can imagine that I would be extremely disturbed at the thought that someone violated a child just to spare me from torture.

Not only that, but by raping and impregnating the child, you are now directly responsible for putting an infant (YOUR child) into the hands of a psychopath.

Saving your loved one is the most selfish, least moral choice.

Assuming he was going to let us go, we'd do what we could to rescue the girl and kid. I'm not sure what the point is with the emphasis of it being your kid, though. Yes you're the dad, but it's with a stranger and there's no real planning or bonding or anything. It's like if I donated sperm and found out some stranger had a kid with my sperm. It's not like I'd be asking for visitation rights or anything.

(February 18, 2014 at 5:47 pm)Chad32 Wrote: Assuming he was going to let us go,

Why would you assume that? It's not stated as a condition of the dilemma, and I certainly wouldn't assume that a psychopath would do such a thing.

(February 18, 2014 at 5:52 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(February 18, 2014 at 5:47 pm)Chad32 Wrote: Assuming he was going to let us go,

Why would you assume that? It's not stated as a condition of the dilemma, and I certainly wouldn't assume that a psychopath would do such a thing.

It's just a vague dilemma where you're forced to do one thing or another. There aren't really any details besides that. I just think that having sex with someone is better than sitting in a room hearing my loved one get tortured.

(February 18, 2014 at 5:59 pm)Chad32 Wrote:

(February 18, 2014 at 5:52 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Why would you assume that? It's not stated as a condition of the dilemma, and I certainly wouldn't assume that a psychopath would do such a thing.

It's just a vague dilemma where you're forced to do one thing or another. There aren't really any details besides that. I just think that having sex with someone is better than sitting in a room hearing my loved one get tortured.

if the consequences were limited to just having sex with someone, I would agree with you 100%.

Fighting the will of one's captors, when one has no possibility of escape, or is otherwise coerced... is not wise.

Not that I wouldn't do my very best to have the 14 year old creature enjoy themselves

(February 18, 2014 at 5:40 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(February 18, 2014 at 5:10 pm)Tonus Wrote: CD's response seems the most rational to me. The simplest way to look at it is, what action am I taking? I am either directly hurting a person or I am not. It is only my choice to harm the young girl in the room with me, NOT the loved one who is at the mercy of the villain. It is in fact his choice to harm my loved one if I refuse to harm the girl. In that case the choice is easy; I would not rape the young girl. Were our positions reversed, I can imagine that I would be extremely disturbed at the thought that someone violated a child just to spare me from torture.

Not only that, but by raping and impregnating the child, you are now directly responsible for putting an infant (YOUR child) into the hands of a psychopath.

Saving your loved one is the most selfish, least moral choice.

I believe it is moral to be selfish & put one's loved one & self first.

(February 17, 2014 at 7:55 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: The person I love most in the world would endure fiendish torture to prevent my becoming a party to rape.

Boru

And if I was the one holding them captive... would you allow the psychological death of your loved one by my hand?

It is not a question of whether they are willing to sacrifice for you... it is a question of whether you will let them be sacrificed for sake of your pathetic nobility.

---

(February 17, 2014 at 8:09 pm)Chad32 Wrote: I assume you're not given time to convince the girl to consent? Though even then, it would still be statutory rape. It seems like a weird question. If he's crazy enough to do this, he's crazy enough to rape her himself.

Where would the fun in that be? I raise you: it is far more thrilling to see them squirm.

---

(February 17, 2014 at 8:13 pm)EgoRaptor Wrote: No he wants the child. And he wants you to be the father.

Ooh... dark~.

Quote:Also the girl is dead set on saving herself, you cannot convince her to give in.

Infact, making her enjoy this situation would probably only make it hurt more in the end. (shame)

The 'kinder' thing to do is to hurt her. Being kind is not always an easy thing.

---

(February 17, 2014 at 9:01 pm)bennyboy Wrote: The girl's trauma may be temporary. She may adapt to it, and may realize some day that it was necessary. My loved one's death will not be temporary, and my loved one will not have any chance to adapt to it. I'd therefore do oit.

There are a lot of 'mays' present here.

Quote:Now, if you turn it around and make it a 14 year-old loved one (a daughter or niece or something), and a stranger being saved, things would appear very different to me.

I hope this 'rich bastard' gives you a perfect view of the pain this stranger is feeling. We wouldn't want you to enjoy yourself too much.