Interesting, i was compared unfavourably to Hitler by DAGTA for saying that if someone potentially had the key to AIDS..

[dug777]

I personally think that the lives of millions of people across the globe are more important than one selfish little blokes's rights, but as i said, i don't think this because i think he's inferior, or i'm superior, or because i have some racial or spiritual agenda, so i found the Hitler comparison extremely offensive and uncalled for...

To make an easy analogy, the situation kinda reminds me of a tv show many of us know and love, 24 😉 I didn't see threads on here comparing Jack Bauer to Hitler because he violated many peoples's rights in order to save millions of people...i know it's just a TV show but i and everyone else i know who watched it came away thinking what Jack did was harsh but neccessary in the situation...

 

[yllus]

Yeah, I agree with him. No way I am for sacrificing individual rights for any greater good. If he wants to do it, fine. Else - screw off.

 

[thelanx]

Read up on a little known (to some) German man by the name of Immanuel Kant. Not to say that you are wrong or anything but just to widen your perspective on things.

 

[mugs]

If someone "potentially had the key to AIDS" I wouldn't think twice about it, because a lot of people are working on curing AIDS and they all potentially have the "key." If someone had a cure for AIDS and was holding out on us I wouldn't bother with legislation, I'd beat it out of him.

Hitler++

 

[randumb]

this thread needs a poll

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: yllus
Yeah, I agree with him. No way I am for sacrificing individual rights for any greater good. If he wants to do it, fine. Else - screw off.

i respect this pov, although i don't agree with it in this case, but i can't see how the Hitler analogy was neccessary...

 

[z0mb13]

where do we stop?

how about liquidating bill gates' assets to help with the deficit? after all he is only one person

how about rounding up people that have some sort of genes that can potentially cure some other disease?

 

[Specop 007]

I think its the individuals right.
Why should I GIVE you the cure for any disease when I KNOW you wont GIVE the cure away?
In other words, I'm not your personal guinea pig to make millions from. Give me a peice of the action (Read: BIG CHECK) or go pound sand.

 

[yllus]

You're right - the comparison is more valid against Stalinesque communists.

 

[DAGTA]

Here are some of the things you wrote in that thread concerning taking away that man's personal rights:

" hell, i'd beat him to death with a 15 inch black rubber cock if i thought it would help"


"****** that...in that situation it's more than an obligation to help imo, and if he decided he didn't want to help, i'd vote for the party that passed legislation forcing him to. Millions of lives potentially saved vs. one selfish douchbag's rights, i know which i, and any other rational person would value more..."


"I'd say offering the bloke a buttload of money (and the veiled threat of what would happen if he didn't take it and help) would solve the problem without delving into this knotty issue"


"indeed, but i'm a 4th year law/economics student, where do you think i sit?"


"says you..and there's nothing rational about what you say

Like i said 'Millions of lives potentially saved vs. one selfish douchbag's rights, i know which i, and any other rational person would value more...' "


"humanity grants, humanity taketh away...in this situation i can see a global forum like the UN coming to exactly the same conclusion i have"


"For gods sake, you really think in this situation his rights are more important that the lives of millions of people?"

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: DAGTA
Here are some of the things you wrote in that thread concerning taking away that man's personal rights:

" hell, i'd beat him to death with a 15 inch black rubber cock if i thought it would help"


"****** that...in that situation it's more than an obligation to help imo, and if he decided he didn't want to help, i'd vote for the party that passed legislation forcing him to. Millions of lives potentially saved vs. one selfish douchbag's rights, i know which i, and any other rational person would value more..."


"I'd say offering the bloke a buttload of money (and the veiled threat of what would happen if he didn't take it and help) would solve the problem without delving into this knotty issue"


"indeed, but i'm a 4th year law/economics student, where do you think i sit?"


"says you..and there's nothing rational about what you say

Like i said 'Millions of lives potentially saved vs. one selfish douchbag's rights, i know which i, and any other rational person would value more...' "


"humanity grants, humanity taketh away...in this situation i can see a global forum like the UN coming to exactly the same conclusion i have"


"For gods sake, you really think in this situation his rights are more important that the lives of millions of people?"

racist? suggesting i support genocide? That i think i'm in any way superior? i think not, at any stage. Oh and if you can't see the first one was a joke you need your sense of humour checked 😛

 

[Gibsons]

I just want to point out that if you really have a lot of money and willpower, all you really need (in theory anyway) from the individual is a few strands of hair. You can save some money and time if you get some blood samples.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: Specop 007
I think its the individuals right.
Why should I GIVE you the cure for any disease when I KNOW you wont GIVE the cure away?
In other words, I'm not your personal guinea pig to make millions from. Give me a peice of the action (Read: BIG CHECK) or go pound sand.

i've no doubt that's what would happen anyway 😉

 

[natto fire]

The problem is, many people were making blind assumptions that this guy had the key to AIDS, without thinking about other possibilities (false positive, the mutated genome that was discussed in that thread, that cannont simply be 'extracted' to cure all AIDS patients). So yeah, making assumptions without knowing the facts is pretty much just as bad as following the Third Reich. Not saying you specifically, but there were some people in that thread that were instantly proclaiming "Kill him, unhelpful bastard OMFG!!one!!1!!", when they did not have the facts of the case. I guess the internet is great like that, you can voice your opinion based on broad assumptions that you don't experience face to face. Socrates would be proud to see how the internet has spawned a bunch of philosophers...

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Specop 007
I think its the individuals right.
Why should I GIVE you the cure for any disease when I KNOW you wont GIVE the cure away?
In other words, I'm not your personal guinea pig to make millions from. Give me a peice of the action (Read: BIG CHECK) or go pound sand.

i've no doubt that's what would happen anyway 😉

I dunno......

Regardless, still the guys choice. In the case of a disease which is preventable I have a hard time drumming up a bunch of sympathy for people who get it.
But so i dont get branded as a homophobe or somesuch, lets take lung cancer. I smoke, I've smoked for 10 years. I WILL get lung cancer, and most likely I WILL suffer a pretty nasty death.
Will you feel sorry for me when I get lung cancer due to smoking? Well...Dont want AIDS? Dont stick your willy in the cave without your spelunking boots and dont shoot up drugs (Yes, theres exceptions to the rule.)

 

[virtueixi]

They all ready have his blood sample, do you want invasive testing done on him too?

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: yllus
Yeah, I agree with him. No way I am for sacrificing individual rights for any greater good. If he wants to do it, fine. Else - screw off.

QFT, once we decide sacrificing one for the greater good is ok when that person is not volunteering, none of us are free.

 

[dug777]

i find it interesting that no one has said anything about my 24 analogy, and thats exactly the same thing...

 

[Mo0o]

So it's ok to sacrifice 1 person to save millions.

What about sacrificing 1 person to save 1000 people, what about 500. Where do you draw the line

 

[xSauronx]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: yllus
Yeah, I agree with him. No way I am for sacrificing individual rights for any greater good. If he wants to do it, fine. Else - screw off.

QFT, once we decide sacrificing one for the greater good is ok when that person is not volunteering, none of us are free.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: Mo0o
So it's ok to sacrifice 1 person to save millions.

What about sacrificing 1 person to save 1000 people, what about 500. Where do you draw the line

the reality is that line is drawn on a regular basis..the US/UK did it when they went into Iraq & Afghanistan...it's a matter of common sense i guess.

 

[myusername]

There's only one poster here who makes threads more obviously attributable to him on subject alone than eyemwing, dug777 ..

 

[Mo0o]

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Mo0o
So it's ok to sacrifice 1 person to save millions.

What about sacrificing 1 person to save 1000 people, what about 500. Where do you draw the line

the reality is that line is drawn on a regular basis..the US/UK did it when they went into Iraq & Afghanistan...it's a matter of common sense i guess.

I'm asking where you draw the line personally since you support what you said before

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: Mo0o

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Mo0o
So it's ok to sacrifice 1 person to save millions.

What about sacrificing 1 person to save 1000 people, what about 500. Where do you draw the line

the reality is that line is drawn on a regular basis..the US/UK did it when they went into Iraq & Afghanistan...it's a matter of common sense i guess.

I'm asking where you draw the line personally since you support what you said before

where it needs to be drawn in the situation. And in this situatiuon no lives need to be sacrificed.

 

[Mo0o]

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Mo0o

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Mo0o
So it's ok to sacrifice 1 person to save millions.

What about sacrificing 1 person to save 1000 people, what about 500. Where do you draw the line

the reality is that line is drawn on a regular basis..the US/UK did it when they went into Iraq & Afghanistan...it's a matter of common sense i guess.

I'm asking where you draw the line personally since you support what you said before

where it needs to be drawn in the situation. And in this situatiuon no lives need to be sacrificed.

What if the person refuses to release the information