Tibet problem

Well first tell me how you determine a life's worth, by wealth? By accomplishments?

I think you believe what you say for the simple reason you want others to feel that way about you.

Personally I think it's clear not all lives have the same worth or "right to life", this is true in practice world wide, I can understand the desire for that concept to be true, a peaceful planet with all living in harmony.

It's never going to happen, so we are left with "Is the drug riddled serial killers life worth the same as the man who created the polio vaccine?" and the answer is no.

This post has been edited by f33dback: Jun 10 2009, 09:03 PM

yes.



Says who? You?



so does the good ol usa



haha, probably older than you amigo. What you call realism I call defeatism.

Then like Ghandi says "you must be the change you wish to see in the world" or something to that effect, good for you.



I look at the world and see that it is not true, what you are stating is a "belief" in practice it's clearly not true.



Yes for things like murder, China kills them for bad press.



Perhaps you have a point here, but I have to say I honestly don't think everyone has the right to life,especially when your "right to life" kills everything around you.

Right see, what you have done right there is shot a huge cannon ball through the bottom of your boat.

Your argument is clearly that someone who is of great benefit to society is more worthy than someone who does not benefit society. This would seem to be, on the face of it, a sensible view. If we examine your argument closer however you are holding up as your exemplar someone who saves lives and someone who takes them. This cannot affect the value judgement on their societal worth unless we start from the premise that all lives have parity.

The everyday practice of making judgement calls over who lives and dies arises from a false dichotomy, either save the scientist or save the serial killer. Never once has such a problem been presented to an individual human being in an actual situation.

What is presented to people, day in day out is the question of whether the suffering of millions of people round the world who you have never met is worth troubling yourself about. Given the difficulties inherent in actually helping them, especially as a private individual, the answer is that you cannot afford to worry about people whose fates you cannot influence. This is an enirely normal reaction but it is not the same as believing that your life is worth more than theirs on a purely objective scale. Not that such a thing exists.

Thats naive. If the US feels threatened by someone for whatever reason they have them killed as well, one example, Fred Hampton, ever heard of cointelpro? What about waco? Ruby Ridge? I'm not here saying China is a shining example of anything good. I just get very tired of americans pointing fingers at other countries when they live in the most brutal, anti-democratic, human rights abusing empires to exist this century.

This post has been edited by deadprez: Jun 10 2009, 09:24 PM

Well for me what comes out of that comment is that most of the time we hear one side of the story, and that through the news, which I hold in low regard.

For the type of person I am I would rather live in the USA than in China, just out of curiosity have you ever requested your FBI file deadprez?

no, never, I'm from canada though. Here our secret police is csis.