100 v. 2 Billion
- Thread starter Prince_James
- Start date
It's a stupid question. Answer this question instead..
Suppose there's this prostitute, right, and she's the best good-time girl that ever walked the earth. She can perform 11 blow-jobs simultaneously and can make you cum with an intensity that you never thought possible; men and women alike come to fuck her from far and wide, and she's regarded in her home nation as some kind of modern-day saint. She charges a small fortune for her services, naturally, and she therefore pays enough taxes to equip her nation's military with 2 gleaming, new stealth bombers each and every year. In other words she can do no wrong.
So, who would you kill: this latterday Mother Teresa, or 2 billion starving Africans, who do nothing but roll around in their own shit, moaning about how 'hungry' they are, and generally being a complete waste of fucking time?
Suppose there's this prostitute, right, and she's the best good-time girl that ever walked the earth. She can perform 11 blow-jobs simultaneously and can make you cum with an intensity that you never thought possible; men and women alike come to fuck her from far and wide, and she's regarded in her home nation as some kind of modern-day saint. She charges a small fortune for her services, naturally, and she therefore pays enough taxes to equip her nation's military with 2 gleaming, new stealth bombers each and every year. In other words she can do no wrong.
So, who would you kill: this latterday Mother Teresa, or 2 billion starving Africans, who do nothing but roll around in their own shit, moaning about how 'hungry' they are, and generally being a complete waste of fucking time?
Pete:
No, I find the world's finest to be above the rabble in general. Their lives more worthy than the lives of 2 billion, both collectively and perhaps even individually.
Oniw17:
Thanks for your answer.
No, I find the world's finest to be above the rabble in general. Their lives more worthy than the lives of 2 billion, both collectively and perhaps even individually.
Oniw17:
Thanks for your answer.
It's only a dumb question because I wouldn't need the "threat" to OK the killing of the lowest 2 billion people.
If the opportunity arose I'd take it tomorrow, it would be so disgustingly immoral to not take it in light of the sorry state of the planet due to overpopulation.
Infact, I would sacrifice the top 100 if that's what needed to be done in order to rid the planet of the bottom 2 billion.
If the opportunity arose I'd take it tomorrow, it would be so disgustingly immoral to not take it in light of the sorry state of the planet due to overpopulation.
Infact, I would sacrifice the top 100 if that's what needed to be done in order to rid the planet of the bottom 2 billion.
Yeah, I'd like to kill 100 people, too.
Roman and Absane:
Why the 100 over the 2 billion?
Also, Absane:
Um, what over population? The world is most wasted. We have the food, water, and energy resources to support tens of billions of humans.
Why the 100 over the 2 billion?
Also, Absane:
Um, what over population? The world is most wasted. We have the food, water, and energy resources to support tens of billions of humans.
I said nothing about over population. Read again.
And OBJECTIVELY I would kill the 2 billion. In real life I would kill the 100 people because some stupid urge in my brain would make me feel "less worse" doing so.
Right, right.
James R and TW Scott would have stood by watching the slaughter of millions in order to feel reassured that they, at least, were moral upstanding citizens with no blood on their hands.
Still, I suppose the 2 billion or whatever can always take comfort in the fact that these two moral persons were at least very unhappy about the situation, and likely to communicate their extreme disapproval to said demon in the strongest possible diplomatic language.
I suppose you'd have three options really. Let the hundred die, let the two billion die, or take the heroic option and try to kill the demon yourself.
Not sure what I'd do, personally. My first instinct would be to let him have the two billion, mostly due to the fact that I'm not all that fond of the human race anyway, and at the very least it would be a promising start. One could always hope that at the least, the aforementioned two moral citizens would be among them.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."
- Edmund Bourke
*Note - It's unclear exactly who "the good" are, in the above quote, but I would be fairly certain they are not those who stand idle in the face of adversity - nor when faced with a decision.
James R and TW Scott would have stood by watching the slaughter of millions in order to feel reassured that they, at least, were moral upstanding citizens with no blood on their hands.
Still, I suppose the 2 billion or whatever can always take comfort in the fact that these two moral persons were at least very unhappy about the situation, and likely to communicate their extreme disapproval to said demon in the strongest possible diplomatic language.
I suppose you'd have three options really. Let the hundred die, let the two billion die, or take the heroic option and try to kill the demon yourself.
Not sure what I'd do, personally. My first instinct would be to let him have the two billion, mostly due to the fact that I'm not all that fond of the human race anyway, and at the very least it would be a promising start. One could always hope that at the least, the aforementioned two moral citizens would be among them.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."
- Edmund Bourke
*Note - It's unclear exactly who "the good" are, in the above quote, but I would be fairly certain they are not those who stand idle in the face of adversity - nor when faced with a decision.
Last edited:
And what if you were one of those 100 bests (not saing that I would be in it). And all those around you have the desease. You look at the other 99 and you see mostly politicians who in the end only look at their own carreer and let luck (not to mentioned under payed capable men) do it's coarse, scientists who are completly nuts and lost all touch with the world and even themselfs and some rich girls who spends daddy's bilions while by pure change driving over the next hitler while he crossed the street.
Would you kill yourself? If it meens saving your partner your kids and parents and some lesser inportant 2 bil people.
Would you kill yourself? If it meens saving your partner your kids and parents and some lesser inportant 2 bil people.
interesting change of point of view
considering in your train thread you would kill 10 innocent people to save 20 in the line of fire.
here is it 100 v 2 billion in the line of fire
I suspect this double standard reflects that you do not genuinely value those members of society you would normally seek to defend. :bugeye:
interesting change of point of view
considering in your train thread you would kill 10 innocent people to save 20 in the line of fire.
here it is 100 v 2 billion in the line of fire
I suspect this double standard reflects that you do not genuinely value those members of society you would normally seek to defend. :bugeye:
Absane:
Sorry. I had mixed up your post with Dr. Lou Natic's.
Sorry. I had mixed up your post with Dr. Lou Natic's.
Dr. Lou Natic:
Um, what over population? The world is most wasted. We have the food, water, and energy resources to support tens of billions of humans.
Um, what over population? The world is most wasted. We have the food, water, and energy resources to support tens of billions of humans.
When was the last time you were given carte blanche to kill bitches?
Listen dumbass, it comes down to which is morally right not killing people or killing people. If you kill the 100 you are guilty for 100 deaths that would not have happned otherwise, your not credited with saving 2 billion lives becuase you didn't do it. Now you refuse to kill 100 people and your hands are clean. hos 2 billion people are not your fault. You didn't infect them and I didn;t say I would just let them die, I just said I would not kill 100 people to save 2 billion unless those 100 are trying to kill the 2 billion.
Yes. I won't have to kill anyone, the virus will be responsible. This demon can see into the future, making my decision easier. The important people could be important because they save the human race, and the Earth would benefit from the reduction in population.
If the demon didn't make any judgements about the 100 or the 2 billion people, then my choice would be to kill the 100.