Difference between revisions of "Talk:Lifeboat ethics"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (forgot sig...)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
You know, I detest this scenario, too (I always said, "Pick the meatiest ones, in case we run out of food"), but your "fallacies" are misplaced.  With the possible exception of the first one, the others are often a fact in sea disasters--boat sinks, more swimmers than boats, problems ensue, lifeboats get swamped, more people drown.  In the real world, of course, there wouldn't be picking and choosing going on--it'd be a first-come, first-serve sort of operation.  Using the Titanic as an example is particularly misguided--much of the death toll can be attributed to a lack of lifeboat space, and (contrary to your scenario) there were fights for lifeboat space, and men had to be restrained at gunpoint to allow the women and children to board.--[[User:RossC|RossC]] 20:37, 8 December 2007 (EST)
 
You know, I detest this scenario, too (I always said, "Pick the meatiest ones, in case we run out of food"), but your "fallacies" are misplaced.  With the possible exception of the first one, the others are often a fact in sea disasters--boat sinks, more swimmers than boats, problems ensue, lifeboats get swamped, more people drown.  In the real world, of course, there wouldn't be picking and choosing going on--it'd be a first-come, first-serve sort of operation.  Using the Titanic as an example is particularly misguided--much of the death toll can be attributed to a lack of lifeboat space, and (contrary to your scenario) there were fights for lifeboat space, and men had to be restrained at gunpoint to allow the women and children to board.--[[User:RossC|RossC]] 20:37, 8 December 2007 (EST)
 +
 +
:Andy, you've got to do better than this.  As a lawyer, you know better than to refute a hypothetical scenario with the argument "this will never happen."  Remember torts class?  You were given a grade over nonsense that would never happen.  Deal with the argument on the merits, and quit being retarded.  --[[User:JamaicanJah|JamaicanJah]] 20:55, 8 December 2007 (EST)

Revision as of 01:55, December 9, 2007

You know, I detest this scenario, too (I always said, "Pick the meatiest ones, in case we run out of food"), but your "fallacies" are misplaced. With the possible exception of the first one, the others are often a fact in sea disasters--boat sinks, more swimmers than boats, problems ensue, lifeboats get swamped, more people drown. In the real world, of course, there wouldn't be picking and choosing going on--it'd be a first-come, first-serve sort of operation. Using the Titanic as an example is particularly misguided--much of the death toll can be attributed to a lack of lifeboat space, and (contrary to your scenario) there were fights for lifeboat space, and men had to be restrained at gunpoint to allow the women and children to board.--RossC 20:37, 8 December 2007 (EST)

Andy, you've got to do better than this. As a lawyer, you know better than to refute a hypothetical scenario with the argument "this will never happen." Remember torts class? You were given a grade over nonsense that would never happen. Deal with the argument on the merits, and quit being retarded. --JamaicanJah 20:55, 8 December 2007 (EST)