View Poll Results: Please Read the First Post

Voters
44. You may not vote on this poll
  • The woman in fact pattern one

    10 22.73%
  • The store owner in fact pattern two

    9 20.45%
  • They both have the right to kill

    17 38.64%
  • Neither has the right to kill

    8 18.18%
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 53

Thread: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

  1. #41
    Professor
    atrasicarius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    12-23-12 @ 05:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    2,227

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    The difference is, killing the guy is homicide and killing the zygote isn't.
    For: legalizing drugs, gay marriage, abortion, guns, universal health care, public sector jobs, nuclear power, free education, progressive taxation
    Against: corporations, make-work, the 40 hour work week, intellectual property, imperialism, "homeland security," censorship

  2. #42
    Advisor GreenvilleGrows's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    My version of reality
    Last Seen
    10-05-12 @ 04:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    566

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Viktyr Korimir View Post
    The store owner can call someone else to come pick up the baby and take it off his hands. If this were not the case, I would absolutely support allowing him to shoot it.

    Children, after birth, can be removed from their parents' homes without harming them.
    I applaud the attempt at consistency. But, the campassion considered in the 2nd statement and the lack of compassion in the 1st don't gell well. How long is too long to be bothered by your child or someone elses? A day, month, or 6 months? Kill a child if they inconvenience you for ..... fill in the blank.

    I'm not arguing against abortion herein. I'm merely stating that killing a helpless human at any age over property rights doesn't make sense. Threatening anothers's life? Probably justified. I'll give the threatened party the benefit of the doubt. Killing a sleeping 1 year old because they might inconvenience you until other arrangements can be mafe? I'll give the child the benefit of the doubt.

    Inconvenience is not the same as danger.
    The US is an odd ship. The captain yells out when he sees obtacles , but 535 individual propellers do the steering.

  3. #43
    Dungeon Master
    Hooter Babe

    DiAnna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,703
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    This "hypothetical" is ridiculous. It's trying to equate the right of a woman... a promiscuous slut, no less... to choose to terminate a pregancy resulting from a rape, with the cold-blooded lying-in-wait murder of a would-be thief by three men in an outdoor auto lot.

    The premise is not only ridiculous, it's dishonest and insulting.

  4. #44
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,814

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    You might find this amusing.

    Hairdresser turns robber into sex-slave RT
    sounds like both should refuse to testify against the other

    I wonder if she looked like the woman in that picture or more like a former Soviet "ladies" shotput champion!



  5. #45
    User BillDaley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    09-08-11 @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    I voted no one has the right to kill - first of all the baby isn't part of the woman's body, it's INSIDE her body (if I sent a wrecking crew to demolish a house with people inside and they died, I couldn't use the argument they were part of the house and in my way) with how far science has come in the last 40 years there is no more denying the baby is alive and human. And in the second one there was no threat made on the owner's life, therefore he has no right to kill either.

  6. #46
    Advisor GreenvilleGrows's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    My version of reality
    Last Seen
    10-05-12 @ 04:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    566

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by BillDaley View Post
    I voted no one has the right to kill - first of all the baby isn't part of the woman's body, it's INSIDE her body (if I sent a wrecking crew to demolish a house with people inside and they died, I couldn't use the argument they were part of the house and in my way) with how far science has come in the last 40 years there is no more denying the baby is alive and human.
    Agreed.

    Quote Originally Posted by BillDaley View Post
    And in the second one there was no threat made on the owner's life, therefore he has no right to kill either.
    At what point, in your mind, does a threat against the owner exist? I'm not being argumentative - I'd like to know. Brandishing a weapon? Verbal threat?

    If you break into someone's home, you are obviously taking the chance that someone will be there whom you will have to harm in order to fulfill whatever act you're there for. Is a business somehow different? The only way I would think someone wasn't endangering my life if they broke into my home or place of work would be if they were already tied up, helpless, and surrendering. I think most people feel that way naturally. Therefore, crooks know that, too. Therefore, crooks know they are threatening occupants when they break in.

    Have you ever entered someone's home or building unsure if the owner was there or knew you were there? I have (legally). Usually, it goes something like this... "Hello! Is anyone here? I'm here for (whatever)... Hello!" And, I'm thinking, if someone's here they're going to be frightened or furious until they figure out why I'm here.
    The US is an odd ship. The captain yells out when he sees obtacles , but 535 individual propellers do the steering.

  7. #47
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,596
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Krhazy View Post
    Inspired by the responses by both conservatives and liberals in: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    FACT PATTERN ONE: A woman is raped and becomes pregnant. The fetus certainly has no evil intentions, but its unwanted presence in the woman's body is causing her moderate-to-serious emotional and psychological trauma. The fetus is two weeks old. She is seeking an abortion. The woman is known to be sexually promiscuous but has taken care to prevent pregnancy while engaging in consensual sex in the past. She has no family to take care of the child for her or help her but has sufficient money and means to raise it herself without sending herself into significant debt.

    FACT PATTERN TWO: A thief climbs over a fence and into the parking lot of a car dealership, intending to steal money or property to pay for his serious drug addiction. He has no intention of hurting anyone -- he believes the property to be empty of employees for the night. As such, he is armed with only a small pocket-knife which he carries on his person at all times. Unbeknownst to him, the store owner is sitting in his office and sees the guy come over the fence. Sensing that the guy is probably a thief, the owner pulls out his shot-gun, barrels out of the building. He wants to shoot the man for trespassing. He thinks the guy might have a gun but is mostly just furious the thief would dare attempt to steal from him. The thief has been on his property for all of forty seconds. The thief has no family to miss him or to ensure that he stays in compliance with the law. The store owner has a wife and kids and enough money to cover losses due to theft without sending his company or himself into significant debt.

    The poll question is: who has the stronger right to kill?neither, of course... Why? Also, which right should be valued more highly -- the right to control of one's property, or the right to control of one's body? about the same... How does culpability play into this question? And anything else you would like to add?
    So we live in a cold hearted kill or be killed world.
    Should it be this way ?
    NO .....its a lousy world in which we live....but, I believe that man is charged to improve it....using his head.....
    Replace the bullets with hard rubber pellets (as an example)
    As to the abortion...the fetus is the innocent victim of man's sin and disrespect.
    Senseless in trying to reason with a rapist....and he is the one who must be killed, if this is what we are going to be doing.
    End of rant....
    Last edited by earthworm; 09-10-11 at 12:05 PM.

  8. #48
    Guru
    celticwar17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,915

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by atrasicarius View Post
    The difference is, killing the guy is homicide and killing the zygote isn't.
    that's only defined by the U.S.'s current law...
    I don't believe we are all just interpreting current law, but objective moral rights/code... so this statement is pointless.

  9. #49
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,201

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Chuck Norris has the stronger right to kill.


    Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?-chuck-norris-jpg

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  10. #50
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Krhazy View Post
    Inspired by the responses by both conservatives and liberals in: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    FACT PATTERN ONE: A woman is raped and becomes pregnant. The fetus certainly has no evil intentions, but its unwanted presence in the woman's body is causing her moderate-to-serious emotional and psychological trauma. The fetus is two weeks old. She is seeking an abortion. The woman is known to be sexually promiscuous but has taken care to prevent pregnancy while engaging in consensual sex in the past. She has no family to take care of the child for her or help her but has sufficient money and means to raise it herself without sending herself into significant debt.

    FACT PATTERN TWO: A thief climbs over a fence and into the parking lot of a car dealership, intending to steal money or property to pay for his serious drug addiction. He has no intention of hurting anyone -- he believes the property to be empty of employees for the night. As such, he is armed with only a small pocket-knife which he carries on his person at all times. Unbeknownst to him, the store owner is sitting in his office and sees the guy come over the fence. Sensing that the guy is probably a thief, the owner pulls out his shot-gun, barrels out of the building. He wants to shoot the man for trespassing. He thinks the guy might have a gun but is mostly just furious the thief would dare attempt to steal from him. The thief has been on his property for all of forty seconds. The thief has no family to miss him or to ensure that he stays in compliance with the law. The store owner has a wife and kids and enough money to cover losses due to theft without sending his company or himself into significant debt.

    The poll question is: who has the stronger right to kill? Why? Also, which right should be valued more highly -- the right to control of one's property, or the right to control of one's body? How does culpability play into this question? And anything else you would like to add?
    I would say neither really has a "right" to kill - but if we're comparing relative rights of the two, I would say the store owner has a stronger case.

    If case 1 had said mentioned pregnancy being potentially or even probably "life-threatening" instead of just psychological and emotional trauma, then I may have switched my position.
    Last edited by StillBallin75; 09-10-11 at 03:25 PM.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •