If your family was being held hostage by terrorists, would you kill the President?

[Paxton25]

That's the situation a doctor faces in a new TV series airing this fall on CBS.
Hostages (TV Series 2013) - IMDb

What would YOU do in this situation?

 

[Autumnleaf]

No. I wouldn't kill anyone. I'd tell the terrorists they got the wrong guy because that is not what I do.

 

[Skaloop]

Without being in that situation, I couldn't say. But I do wonder about why you put that picture in your post; it's not really relevant to the question.

 

[BrianJK]

I would hope I would have the faith not to. Similarly, if a foreign dictator told me to bow down to him or he would throw me in a furnace, I would hope I would have the faith not to bow.

 

[Paxton25]

Without being in that situation, I couldn't say. But I do wonder about why you put that picture in your post; it's not really relevant to the question.

Actually, it is. While the President of the United States was once regarded as the most powerful man in the Free World, he is now merely a puppet of Wall Street and Corporate America along with the Military Industrial Complex that is hellbent on global conquest and is currently trashing the world.

Killing the Doofus in the Oval Office is as inconsequential as killing a homeless person. The Police States of America marches on, left foot, right foot, no matter who is President. The NSA, DHS, TSA, FBI, FEMA, IRS, & the FED see to that.

In the days of John F. Kennedy, it mattered who was elected President of the United States. That is no longer the case.

When I saw the promo for Hostages, I thought to myself, ''Where's the drama? I'd do it in a heartbeat. There's nothing special or genuine about Barry Soetoro whatsoever. They'll just find another clown to read from the teleprompter.''

I predict many viewers will feel the same way about Hostages and that it will be cancelled due to political apathy.

 

[Skaloop]

I would hope I would have the faith not to. Similarly, if a foreign dictator told me to bow down to him or he would throw me in a furnace, I would hope I would have the faith not to bow.

But bowing to a dictator is harmless and meaningless. It's merely a physical act that says nothing of your actual feelings on the matter and has no consequences other than you not getting thrown into a furnace.

 

[jayem]

The show's premise is exceedingly far-fetched. I work in health care. POTUS would be the highest profile surgical patient imagineable. There may be one lead surgeon, but a entire team of specialists would be involved, and every aspect of care would be subject to extreme security and oversight. I don't know how a single team member--even a lead surgeon-- could pull off a major surgical or medication error, or equipment failure, or some other catastrophic event. And even if a serious operative mishap occurs, a President will get immediate, full-court-press, no-holds-barred life support. How can the conspirators be certain he'll actually die? Seems to me that this would be a ridiculous way to assassinate someone. Way too complicated with too many variables. But I guess I'll have to watch the show to see what the writers have dreamed up.

 

[Ringo84]

Seems like a non sequitur to me. What good would it do to kill the president if terrorists are holding my family hostage?
Ringo

 

[Stone Butterfly]

Without being in that situation, I couldn't say. But I do wonder about why you put that picture in your post; it's not really relevant to the question.

This entire thread question isn't relevant to real life nor is it decent for a Christian forum.
"Would you MURDER someone?"

 

[keith99]

Seems like a non sequitur to me. What good would it do to kill the president if terrorists are holding my family hostage?
Ringo

That is the generic problem terrorists and kidnappers face. They are not considered reliable.

Game changes if some group establishes a reputation for keeping their end of such deals.

 

[keith99]

The show's premise is exceedingly far-fetched. I work in health care. POTUS would be the highest profile surgical patient imagineable. There may be one lead surgeon, but a entire team of specialists would be involved, and every aspect of care would be subject to extreme security and oversight. I don't know how a single team member--even a lead surgeon-- could pull off a major surgical or medication error, or equipment failure, or some other catastrophic event. And even if a serious operative mishap occurs, a President will get immediate, full-court-press, no-holds-barred life support. How can the conspirators be certain he'll actually die? Seems to me that this would be a ridiculous way to assassinate someone. Way too complicated with too many variables. But I guess I'll have to watch the show to see what the writers have dreamed up.

Simplest is to just make the procedure dicey to start with, perhaps experimental where this is the only available person who has done it before.

 

[jayem]

Simplest is to just make the procedure dicey to start with, perhaps experimental where this is the only available person who has done it before.

If the President is already that sick, with a condition that hard to treat, then he's probably out of action anyway. And whoever wants him dead could just let nature take its course.

 

[Hetta]

Killing the Doofus in the Oval Office is as inconsequential as killing a homeless person.

It is never "inconsequential" to kill a person - whether they be homeless or the President.

 

[Ringo84]

Killing the Doofus in the Oval Office is as inconsequential as killing a homeless person.

Boy...I sure can feel the Christian love - as well as the much-discussed concern for life - in this thread!
Ringo

 

[Hetta]

Boy...I sure can feel the Christian love - as well as the much-discussed concern for life - in this thread!
Ringo

Exactly.

 

[keith99]

If the President is already that sick, with a condition that hard to treat, then he's probably out of action anyway. And whoever wants him dead could just let nature take its course.

Hardly. Difficult to treat is far from untreatable. A disease, injury or deformity that has a 20% chance of being fatal is plenty that one more kick spells death. But an 80% chance of recovery is far too much for those wanting him dead.

And of course if the reason is true terrorism getting the president that way is pretty good, even if they care not one bit who is in the white house.

 

[Paxton25]

Boy...I sure can feel the Christian love - as well as the much-discussed concern for life - in this thread!
Ringo

So, you're one of the saints who voted NO and would allow terrorists to murder your family in cold blood, is that right?

So many protests, but so few YES or NO votes. That indicates shame and cowardice.

If our actions in crises matched our core beliefs and ideals, we wouldn't need ethics, would we? Ethics are what we should do, given a particular situation. Reality is what we would do, given a particular situation.

There's no shame in admitting that our realities don't match our ideals. Every day, we are forced to choose between our core beliefs and ideals and the realities of life. Most choices are easy, while others like this hostage-president dilemma are not.

Unlike this poll, you won't be able to weasel out of answering YES or NO when that time comes. Your choices will define who and what you REALLY believe.

 

[Ringo84]

I'm not talking about imaginary, Dick Cheney wet dream scenarios such as the one in the OP. I'm specifically talking about your ugly rhetoric about the President:

Killing the Doofus in the Oval Office is as inconsequential as killing a homeless person.

It seems to me that your words are defining to us "who and what you REALLY believe", and I don't think that most of us like what we see.

"They'll know we are Christians by our love"
Ringo

 

[Eudaimonist]

I doubt that my family would want me to become a murderer for their sake.

In any case, I would not trust the terrorists to honor their word, and I would try to find any way possible to have my family rescued.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Hetta]

So, you're one of the saints who voted NO and would allow terrorists to murder your family in cold blood, is that right?

So many protests, but so few YES or NO votes. That indicates shame and cowardice.

If our actions in crises matched our core beliefs and ideals, we wouldn't need ethics, would we? Ethics are what we should do, given a particular situation. Reality is what we would do, given a particular situation.

There's no shame in admitting that our realities don't match our ideals. Every day, we are forced to choose between our core beliefs and ideals and the realities of life. Most choices are easy, while others like this hostage-president dilemma are not.

Unlike this poll, you won't be able to weasel out of answering YES or NO when that time comes. Your choices will define who and what you REALLY believe.

The lack of interest in your poll merely indicates that it sucks.

What I really believe is that I wouldn't 'murder' either a homeless person or a president.