Kill an innocent to save the world?

Diana Notacat said:
The question isn't about whether or not Fate and the vision is true or not. D:

The question is about whether or not you could do the deed! >> Forcing people to make a difficult choice and think about why they would or wouldn't! D:
Click to expand...

Perhaps that was your intent, but the very act of asking the question opens up more then just a moment to reflect. It's a hideous hypothetical question that has no 'right or wrong' answer but it does have an ugly moral outlook because almost every answer is 'wrong' to someone.
 
Sacrifice the one for the many. Unless its myself or one of my own. Then I burn the world.
 
I once watched "The Omen (I am now referring to the remake version that was the one that spooked me)," and when I watch Damien Thorn do all that nasty stuff, I have an urge to stop him, even though I know fate (or rather, the scriptwriters) had him go through the process of successfully completing his mission and grow up to be an Anti-Christ. And if you know me well, I would always follow me heart than my mind.

I guess you could call it faith. I watched a few anime, and they talk about this several times, about how the hero/heroine would go through all that pressure and obstacles of 'fate' to achieve his/her goal, wanting to fight against the heavens, and they claim it was because of the undenying human spirit.

Well, I don't completely disagree with that. I would fight, too, to survive. Call me selfish and everything, but that's just how I am. I will fight till the very bitter end to survive, because if there's one thing I hate more than living, is death. In fact, I fear it. So, the fear would drive me enough that I would pull all the stops to stop that baby from growing up into a man, even if I have execute him myself.

Of course, it would take an enormous amount of boldness from me (not courage). Killing an adult man is scary enough for me, let alone killing an infant.
 
Can I try and be realistic here and say that it'd be a pretty stupid idea to try to take over the world because someone will always fight back, and win?

Or am I gonna have to go with saying that saving the world isn't worth the trouble since we're all gonna die either way?
 
Stalin once said that one death is a tragedy, a million a statistic.

If killing one child saves millions, then let's do it.

Besides, I've been meaning to test out the theory brought about by the essay 'A Modest Proposal.'

REAL baby back ribs DRIPPING WITH SAUCE!!!
 
Hey, Road Rage has it right.

If you can commit murder for the Greater Good, why not just go all the way and farther.

Sweet Baby Ray's Barbecue sauce.

DROWN GUILT WITH IT!
 
i was taught to neutralize a threat as soon as it arises and if you now the consequences of inaction are far worse than the consequences of action then there is no need to feel guilty about it.

in short, as cold as it seems, i'd plug the baby. but don't think bad of me, i love kids......especially when they're old enough to retrieve a beer from the fridge
 
No, A world stained with the blood of the innocent is a world spiraling into corruption and depravity. No matter how many people would die, you condemn them all by showering them with innocent blood. I would rather watch the world be destroyed and everyone I love along with it than watch them spiral out of control into depravity.
 
People will get over it. I feel cruelness is getting more and more subjective. Killing a human baby and people go, "Ah!!11! OMG!" But eating a baby calf seems all so natural as a way of life.

Besides, this world is already fucked up. And look at how we react to it. Still happy and fapping.
 
So by my count, it seems as thought many people are willing to kill an innocent baby to save the world... I think if this really was the case no one would have the courage to actually do the deed.

You're all talk! .... No offense.
 
I say screw the baby and leave it be. Where the hell are it's goddamn parents? They need a spanking. All those people sitting back not doing anything about that evil baby's evil baby deeds need a spanking. Everyone complaining about how things are going and not doing anything about it need a spanking.

It isn't one person who ruins a world, it's a collective. One cog gets a wheel rolling but only one wheel can't make the world turn. All the wheels have to move along with the first wheel. Be the monkey that throws the wrench!

IT WASN'T ONE BLANKET THAT DID IT, IT WAS A BUNCH.

And I agree with Clover. You fools be all talk. If not then that's just sick.


I hope that I am that evil Hitler baby so that I can bite all your faces off. Now that I know in advance that you lumbering mantoddlers and crazy harpies will be after me...I'm going after all of you first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I'd do it.

Great Demon Hunter Daiki said:
I call this the idea the "Hitler Paradox." If you ever seen the episode of the Twilight Zone, a maid from the future goes back in time and drowns baby Hitler. However, another house maid steals a poor smuck's child and replaces the baby that was drowned. It's not the Hitler we know from our world, but it still comes to pass. As Jinx already mentioned, if you believe in such a concept as fate then no matter what you do then someone else could have easily taken over that role. So let's use Hitler as our guinea pig. If he was removed, then the west would have focused on Stalin as the face of all evil with the 22 million people he murdered in the Gulags.
Click to expand...

Mostly I'd do it because I don't believe in fate, even though this whole thing is based off the given that Hitler is from the prompt's perspective fated to become the mass-murdering fuckhead he grew up to be. Especially from a historical perspective it might seem like there was no other way his life could have turned out.

To me there's no such thing as "no matter what you do" because there's always a choice or a chance somewhere at some point in time. And to me the only time something happens "no matter what you do" is because enough people go along with it and just give up on trying to change things.

Amp's right about it taking more than one person for an evil mass-murdering baby to gain power.

I don't know about the rest of you but if I had the chance to stop something like that & didn't take it. . . I couldn't stand to look at another human being whose life who was going to be tragically altered because of that.

Taking the example of if you took out Hitler, then the world would have just focused on Stalin. . . so what? Could you look at someone who lost their family to the Holocaust, survived the death camps, and say:

"I could have taken out Hitler. But what would have been the point? Then you all would have just focused on Stalin."

Who they focused on afterward doesn't matter, what would matter was saving those that you were able to given the chance. Even if they didn't know it happened and you didn't tell another soul either. Maybe I just don't like that particular example.

But it still wouldn't change my mind.
 
He's got a point.

Plus there's all the advances in technology we'd miss out on through the war.

War or kill a baby to stop the war...

God dammit, now I'm reconsidering my previous decision...

DAMN YOUSE ORION!!!
 
now to throw in a kicker: is the baby still an "innocent" if you know it will be evil?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back