(May 2, 2012 at 12:06 am)Drich Wrote:(May 1, 2012 at 11:58 pm)genkaus Wrote:(May 1, 2012 at 11:56 pm)Drich Wrote:(May 1, 2012 at 10:16 pm)genkaus Wrote:(May 1, 2012 at 10:11 pm)Drich Wrote: then what does it matter who dies?
So you wouldn't save either?
No one dies before their time. No one lives beyond their alotted time. we all die. It's not like any effort I could put fourth would extend anyone eternal life. So even if I saved 4 or 100 people they would all eventually die anyway. So again If this was just 104 random people and I was made to choose I would refuse to play.
So, you would let all of them die.
What you all fail to see is the illusion of control you are exercising in this scenario. You are not saving anyone you are murdering either 4 or 100 people. If you say or do nothing, then those who kill the 4 or 100 are the murders. So the only honorable answer is to "not play" this sick game.
Truthfully are you so deceived by simple wording you do not see your willing participation in the murder of a family of four or 100 random people?
Interesting how you are dancing all around the issue on a simple yes/no question. So, in conclusion, you would refrain form making a choice, thereby leading to the death of 104 people.
