It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by TheomExperience
Here is one of the issues i have with this philosophy.
If you are somehow 100% certain this baby will go on to be a murder/mass murderer whatever, and you decided to kill it, then you have altered this 100% chance of the baby becoming a killer.
What i can deduce from this can only be that there is no 100% certainty once the observer becomes aware of future events.
The future can either be changed or it cant, and if it can be changed then no need to kill baby period.
This at least solves my hypothetical ethical conundrum.edit on 29-7-2013 by TheomExperience because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Killing a newborn? Absolutely not EVER.
If they are born and out of the womb kicking and screaming, they should not be killed under ANY circumstance.
I honestly can't even believe this is a question that needs to be asked.
Originally posted by Unity_99
reply to post by SaturnFX
That isn't God, anything to do with smiting and murder was not and will never be The Highest Love and Goodness, in existence, the Infinite Consciousness, which is only expressed in Goodness. Because in regression, its shrinking, only in progression does it grow.
The bible is an inner process. But turning those things outer flips it around severely.
Originally posted by SaturnFX
Gets you out of answering the question anyhow.
So lets then put a hypothetical addition to it.
You are watching tele in your living room, suddenly a woosh of light and energy comes in front of you...a future version of yourself walks through...looks like you but older, you compare tats or whatever to make sure your talking to yourself. Finally, the very last moments of his allocated time here, he says the neighbor kid turns into a monster unlike the world has ever seen..making hitler look like a boyscout. You try to ask when, how, why, but sadly he gets sucked back into his timeline/dimension
So there...you know then the future, but you don't know how, when, etc..hell, maybe going over there and trying to intervene sets it all off, you donno..
You can simply not answer of course...but trying to get out of the question on a hypothetical imagination game of moral dilemma's is a cop out. might as well just say like everyone else...no way to know 100% and move along...but do realize in doing that you are also dismissing star trek because they show ftl travel and that's impossible also, so that's a silly show, etc...
Originally posted by SaturnFX
Unless the rehabilitation was the thing that caused them to kill of course (being treated for something you didn't do may drive them insane and make them react violently)
Originally posted by djr33222
reply to post by ButterCookie
In the highly philosophical sense evil is subjective, yes. We don't have to call Hitler evil. You can call him whatever you want. The fact remains though that when you murder innocent people wholesale you deserve the worst treatment possible. If some people could take Hitler to their basement and torture him for a month while having his screams lull them to sleep they probably would, and he would deserve such treatment. What would name-calling and evil this or evil that have to do with the situation I just described?
Originally posted by Unity_99
reply to post by SaturnFX
I am waking up and some things knew from birth. Don't buy into the worlds programming but always knew. Remembered even as a toddler beaming in like a shooting star or ray of light and taking this reddish warm snuggly place.
Definitive you bet. You cannot harm.
This world is a warzone, and to leave this level you have to go beyond.
Originally posted by FreedomEntered
I don't even know why this debate is happening.
Are you serious?
Are you really willing to justify murder?
Sick
Originally posted by Blue Shift
In the old days before everybody got so litigious, doctors delivering babies would occasionally kill newborns if they were hideously deformed to a point where it would have a terrible life and it would also ruin the parent's life as well.
As illustrated by nature, life is not an end to itself. The natural course of life always leads to death. Short or long, life is only a transitional state between non-existence and death. So the idea is to minimize suffering while we're here, but not maintain life at all costs.
As for "letting God decide," that's why a god would give us eyes with which to see and a brain with which to think, and would allow us to kill if necessary. Do you think a god couldn't stop you if it really wanted to? Don't be silly.
Originally posted by kosmicjack
It's so interesting that we have nine pages of some deep philosophical and sociological questions and debate about a provocative topic and yet there are only a few flags. To me, its more of a reflection of how fundamentally abhorrent to the nature of humans it is to kill a child than it is a reflection on this great alternative discussion. The title of the thread colors ones initial inclination on the broader topic.edit on 7/29/2013 by kosmicjack because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by kosmicjack
It's so interesting that we have nine pages of some deep philosophical and sociological questions and debate about a provocative topic and yet there are only a few flags. To me, its more of a reflection of how fundamentally abhorrent to the nature of humans it is to kill a child than it is a reflection on this great alternative discussion. The title of the thread colors ones initial inclination on the broader topic.edit on 7/29/2013 by kosmicjack because: (no reason given)