Which one would you kill?

[Nihilismus]

What standards are those?

 

[TheBear]

The OP is but an extension of myself, as you are.

I feel as though I've just entered the Matrix.

 

[Garyzenuf]

Still, 2 are dead because of a choice you made. Shift the blame and call yourself moral if you want. But would Bilo's or Bobo's mother agree?

Probably not, but I don't care as they've both let the responsibilty for taking care of these two to me.


OK..OK...fine..geez, I'll give you an answer....wait..could I lock them in a big cage with 12th century battle axes and have them decide it for themselves?

*

 

[Avatar]

Probably not, but I don't care as they've both let the responsibilty for taking care of these two to me.


OK..OK...fine..geez, I'll give you an answer....wait..could I lock them in a big cage with 12th century battle axes and have them decide it for themselves?

*

I would have gone with straight razors, but yes, much better.

 

[Caitlin.ann]

I'm killing the retarded kid..keeping the chimp.

 

[morningstar2651]

Biblical dominion speaks of authority and accountability to God for the decisions made and how we handle the resources He has entrusted to our care. It means to be a caretaker of God's property not the owner of it.

Literary dominion speaks of absolute authority to do whatever you please with the resources because you own them.

Then why call it dominion when you know the literal definition of the word?

 

[Polycarp_fan]

To clarify - there is no punishment, no matter which one you kill. Whichever one you choose will have a painless death. And WHY did you pick one or the other?

Animal.

Kuh-click

P-POW.

Now lunch.

You just can't eat a kid. Too greasy when fried I was told.

Chimps are lean muscled.

And . . . they are an ANIMAL!!!

I've reported this thread to my fellow vegetarians over at PETA though. (Shh, they don't it's me posting here. Sarcasm is tasty too)

 

[bsd13]

Then why call it dominion when you know the literal definition of the word?

I made the mistake of assuming you would take the time to read the passage of scripture which makes it clear how the word is used. Not to mention taking a look at it in the original and seeing the meaning there.

 

[Avatar]

I made the mistake of assuming you would take the time to read the passage of scripture which makes it clear how the word is used. Not to mention taking a look at it in the original and seeing the meaning there.

Psst. You're expecting a bit much. He's 23 and worships trees...

 

[CreedIsChrist]

How gifted is the chimp? Can it talk? Can it do sums? Can it read and understand Nietzsche?

If the chimp is a fan of Nietzsche then I would kill the chimp.

 

[Nihilismus]

Is someone able to point out how a blithering retard is more valuable than a moderately intelligent chimpanzee?

 

[angellica]

Is someone able to point out how a blithering retard is more valuable than a moderately intelligent chimpanzee?

Why are you more valuable than a moderately intelligent chimp? Or are you?

 

[Nihilismus]

I would say that nothing is more inherently valuable than anything else. It is subjective.

In your view, however, the chimp is not a "person". It could have the mental capacity of a bank manager and you'd still kill it over the dolt. Why?

 

[angellica]

I would say that nothing is more inherently valuable than anything else. It is subjective.

In your view, however, the chimp is not a "person". It could have the mental capacity of a bank manager and you'd still kill it over the dolt. Why?

So are the retarded person and the intelligent chimp of equal value?

Mental capacity is not the only measure of worth.

 

[morningstar2651]

So are the retarded person and the intelligent chimp of equal value?

Mental capacity is not the only measure of worth.

What do you think of my solution to the problem?

I'd flip a coin to decide.

 

[Nihilismus]

So are the retarded person and the intelligent chimp of equal value?

Inherently, yes.

Mental capacity is not the only measure of worth.

Care to elaborate? According to you, a "person" is more valuable than an "unperson" and mental capacity is not the sole determinant of a "person". This does not leave us any closer to understanding what a "person" is. Help us out here.

 

[angellica]

What do you think of my solution to the problem?

I'd flip a coin to decide.

I guess you see a human life and an animal life as equal. I don't agree with you if that's the case.

 

[angellica]

Inherently, yes.


Care to elaborate? According to you, a "person" is more valuable than an "unperson" and mental capacity is not the sole determinant of a "person". This does not leave us any closer to understanding what a "person" is. Help us out here.

People have souls and animals don't. I base that on what the Bible tells me, so I don't expect you to accept that but oh well. Hopefully you will at some point.

 

[morningstar2651]

I guess you see a human life and an animal life as equal. I don't agree with you if that's the case.

I don't.

I'm not justifying the decision to kill on arbitrary values placed on life.

I'm giving each a fair chance at surviving.

Neither deserves to be killed.

 

[angellica]

I don't.

I'm not justifying the decision to kill on arbitrary values placed on life.

I'm giving each a fair chance at surviving.

Neither deserves to be killed.

By giving them both an equal chance, you are placing equal value on both of them.