This will be an ethical question thread, that will relate mainly to religious beliefs and ethics. Hopefully it will be a good idea and people will want to play.
Each week I will present a topic, and you may discuss it, and bring your morality into the question.
This week: soldiers have come to search your house! They will kill you and eat you if they find you. You are hiding in the closet farther away from the door than your friend who is hiding underneath a sofa. The people eating soldiers stop in front of the sofa, and start bending over slowly to see if there is anyone underneath it. You see this through the crack in the door. You have 2 choices to jump out, scream and run out the door to save your bestest friend in the whole world, or you can watch them drag him away.
basically would you save yourself? or would you save your friend.
I wouldn't kill her, it just isn't right to take someone's life unless you do so defensively. Even if the money would go to bad people, you'd be a bad person for killing for cash anyway.
I wouldn't do it. It's murder and I just don't see myself committing that act.
Off topic: DDX just wait till you get to upper level chem/bio courses. Thats where the fun is at. General chemistry is a bunch of junk that is wrong anyways. Organic is where the fun is at.
The murder would be for the better, however, the woman may desire to live on. But the fact that she causes no happiness to herself, I wouldn't think she would be more at a loss for dieing than living on, given that it is not a painful death. Personally i think it is a morally justifiable act. However I would think the majority of the public would say otherwise, so I wouldn't commit murder myself.
on a side note, an extreme act like this may haunt the person in the future if such person wishes to be a good person if the person's perception of the act changes. it would be safer to not commit the murder.
Hello Folks! glad all of you could put such good insight into your posting! I really enjoy doing this with you guys. Now you waited and here it is new question!
+++Dilemma+++ You run an orphanage and have had a hard time making ends meet. A car dealership offers you a new van worth $15,000 for free if you will falsely report to the government that the dealership donated a van worth $30,000. You really need the van and it will give you an opportunity to make the children happy. Do you agree to take the van?
If I were placed in this position I would rather take the van under honest cirumstances rather lying to the government. While it would offer many positives I would be living with a lie knowing I heled the dealership right off $15000 for something they didn't do...
I think that in this case, the children have more of a need than the government does. It's not going to hurt them if they give a bit more of a refund than they should have.
basically the dealership makes 15 grand, and with that money they can do whatever with it, because supposedly it went to an orphanage's van.
I believe donations are tax deductible so technically the dealership is saving up to 20,000 dollars (5000 for what they don't have to pay) (no hate at all what so ever, but here is a quote "welcome to obama's America, where the poor steal from the rich and the government steals from the rich also"
And that would mean a larger refund, or less you owe, correct? I don't know much about that system, but I'm trying to figure it all out since I'll have to start paying taxes once I get a job.
And that would mean a larger refund, or less you owe, correct
if the government chose to give a refund that would mean more, yes.
And it definitely means less you owe. You pay less money and keep more money. Though it is unethical. which is why I leave it up to you guys to decide before I give my answer.
if the government chose to give a refund that would mean more, yes.
And it definitely means less you owe. You pay less money and keep more money. Though it is unethical. which is why I leave it up to you guys to decide before I give my answer.
That's what I thought, thanks for confirming that.
I would do it (in this situation) you get money + you get to stick it to the government as Green12324 said the need of the children out weighs the need of the governtment especially if you are running on hard times.
Wow I didn't know people had such an aversion towards government!
But really I would also keep the van because of the fact that the children would need it more. As unethical as it is (stealing technically from the government) I would rather see the money here put to good use than going into the "rainy day war fund"
