Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Castle -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (1660)	5/31/2003 5:46:10 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7936

You're right. There are no easy answers.

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (1660)	6/4/2003 5:21:30 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7936

"Saving Lives" is a false notion many people use to justify or condemn acts of violence. No body gets "saved." On top of that you have to determine who's life you are going to keep animated on the planet and who's life you are going to allow to pass. This ridiculous dilemma is a totally irresolvable conflict on moral grounds. Especially when you are simply playing the numbers game. We could double the population of the earth by simply engaging in more efforts to keep people alive. Interesting how some of the numbers people change their tone when we begin to talk about the environment. However, it is incumbent on all decent people to take a stand for justice and against injustice, regardless of the risks to their own livelihood. Under this umbrella you can make the argument for "saving" innocent victims from the tyranny of their torturous and murderous oppressors (i.e. Saddams).