|
 |
Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospam com> wrote:
> There's nothing philosophical about it, Warp. If you're forcing people
> to take an injection, you're in the wrong, just as much as someone who's
> forcefully injecting people for experimental purposes.
Saving millions of people's lives is the same as "forcefully injecting
people for experimental purposes"? I think you are deliberately twisting
the issue.
It's not an experiment. We know that we can eradicate polio. We know that
we would be saving people's lives. There's no question about it.
Let me put it this way: If there were a country out there that regularly
engages in ritual sacrifice of humans, would you want to intervene?
If your answer is no, then we have to disagree (and I'm tempted to use
some not-very-nice words to describe your attitude.)
If your answer is yes, then what exactly is the practical difference to
the polio vaccine situation? In both cases we would be saving the lives
of innocent people. Would it happen by force? Yes. Would it matter? No.
> > The thing is, we *know* it's good for them. With actual physical hard
> > evidence. And it's not like it's some kind of ideology or culture we are
> > trying to "spread" to them. It's a disease we are trying to cure so that
> > everybody will be a bit safer.
> They *don't* know it. They need to be educated and make a free choice.
Would you stop human sacrifice when you see it, or would just "educate"
them and hope that perhaps one day they will change their rituals?
Every time you are not stopping human sacrifice when you would have the
means to do so, you are allowing an innocent person to die.
No, I just cannot agree with the bullshit sentiment that we should just
obey their wish to commit suicide and take tons of people with them, many
of them who would not want to die or get crippled for life. If they don't
agree, then it's too bad for them. They don't have a say when we are
talking about human life. Life takes priority over cultural bullshit.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
