=== Whether John McCain or Barack Obama, remember to register to vote! ===

ARE WE MORALLY OBLIGATED TO ACT IF MASS MURDER IS OCCURRING?

user ballots

ethics :

ARE WE MORALLY OBLIGATED TO ACT IF MASS MURDER IS OCCURRING?


[+] serious ballot by FiddleFaddleOnLSD
created Thu Oct 19, 06

If we or our country were to obtain knowledge that mass murder or genocide is taking place, are we morally obligated to act to stop this from occurring?

Say for example... Cambodia under Pol Pot, the Holocaust, Rwanda, Uganda, Kurds under Saddam Hussein, Darfur, Sudan....

Can we excuse ourselves from acting? Or is there a moral obligation as a country or even as humans to act to stop a genocide of the type listed above?

Yes, we are morally obligated to act
No, we are not

Ballot #103684 : SEE RESULTS

Comment:

show your vote with comment?

v 2.0 © BESTANDWORST.COM
smile bank:










similiar ballots:
96047. If a murder is about to happen, are you morally obligated to try and stop it?
121972. Do you feel obligated ?
54067. 'The desire to create weapons of mass destruction' is NOT the same as actually HAVING weapons of mass destruction. Do you agree?
76613. Is poverty morally unacceptable?
129718. Is it morally wrong to serve fish sticks to children watching Finding Nemo?
90147. My worry about banning abortion: it could start a dangerous precedent of banning things simply because a certain group finds it morally wrong.
105874. Why are Iraqis killing each other in mass numbers?
119565. Mass protests against Chavez in Venezuela?
12066. Which nations have weapons of mass destruction and should be disarmed?
114092. How do you feel about the VA Tech mass-murdering LOSER...


COMMENTS:
The top picture is a map of the Darfur region. About 90% of the red and orange spots are villages that are either confirmed to destroyed or heavily damaged.

The bottom picture is irregular combatants. The sign of the car says Sudanese "Liberation" army. The ones involved in murder.
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Thu Oct 19, 06 8:37pm [+]

I'm interested in seeing the "justifications" for those voting no.
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Thu Oct 19, 06 8:40pm [+]

As a country, no. As a member of the U.N. absolutely...but we all know how good their record is regarding "inervention" and "peacekeeping".
by um__yeah on Thu Oct 19, 06 8:44pm [+]

Unfortunately, you are right um_yeah.

Sorry I biased my earlier comment about justification by adding apostrophes.
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Thu Oct 19, 06 8:51pm [+]

Voted : Yes, we are morally obligated to act
Although the fact that we are morally obligated doesn't mean that as soon as we learn of the genocide we should go charging in, regardless of the consequences. Invasions, even morally correct invasions (if there are such things), take time to plan, and patience to execute. I would think the medical mantra "Do no further harm." fits well in this case.
by himself809 on Thu Oct 19, 06 9:12pm [+]

We should have an obligation to each other as human beings over and above commond bonds of nationality, ideally. What significance is there in a coincidence of geography/demography, after all?
by lil_ape on Thu Oct 19, 06 9:34pm [+]

Far too much importance is placed on nationality IMO.
by lil_ape on Thu Oct 19, 06 9:36pm [+]

Yes. I agree sort of whith what um_yeah said.

Although, acting as a country might not be legally 'right', what's legally right and what's moral isn't always the same.

Like himself said, it should be done with careful considerations.
by Grumpy_Person on Thu Oct 19, 06 10:24pm [+]

Voted : Yes, we are morally obligated to act
^What Grumpy said.
by skylab on Fri Oct 20, 06 5:06am [+]

Voted : Yes, we are morally obligated to act
If we can do something then yes.

The UN is obligated by its own laws to do something, but once they have proven that they have no intention of going in it should be up to individual nations to do something.
by herzog on Fri Oct 20, 06 5:45am [+]

Voted : Yes, we are morally obligated to act
Although w ehave to be careful not to be "used" by lying government or other interests who just want to position a situation in such a way so as to get people to oppose some rival.
by Cathexis on Fri Oct 20, 06 7:59am [+]

Voted : Yes, we are morally obligated to act
No excuse for not acting.
by Black_Lava on Fri Oct 20, 06 12:15pm [+]

What, Cathexis? Are you saying Bush-bad if he were to act? Or Bush-bad if not to act? In plain English, please.
by Black_Lava on Fri Oct 20, 06 12:18pm [+]

Voted : Yes, we are morally obligated to act
I'd certainly like to believe that we are. Whether we do or not, unfortunately, fall into the realm of political expediency.
by Truthseeker013 on Fri Oct 20, 06 1:42pm [+]

Good question.
by Applerod on Fri Oct 20, 06 3:00pm [+]

Voted : Yes, we are morally obligated to act
I suppose we are just as obligated to act as we have felt we were in stopping the spread of Communism. Its even a better cause!
by Freon on Fri Oct 20, 06 11:14pm [+]

Voted : Yes, we are morally obligated to act
Tough question but leaning to a yes. If it is so obiously a massicre.
by Elashia on Sun Oct 22, 06 10:35pm [+]






About Us | Join Us | Privacy Policy | Contact
© 2002-2008 BestAndWorst.com All Rights Reserved