http://www.litmuse.net/prompt_hijack
This is my second attempt at this blog because I first did not look at all the research involved. But now I will say that I agree and disagree with the policies that we have against terrorism. I clicked on the first link with the policies and thought okay that is a good idea not to give into terrorist. Then I went back for a second look and saw that there was also so decent ideas about why the policies are wrong.
To be in a position to have to make decisions about whether someone lives or dies at the hands of terrorism is never where I want to be. Take a minute to look at 9/11, a lot of people lost their lives because of terrorism, 3,000 innocent live taken. Now at first I thought IF I had to make the choice to give into a terrorists demand, my first thought would have been to say "Hell No, we will not give into their demands!! A few must die to save millions." My thoughts were if we give into the demands then that will cause a domino effect with every other terrorist cell thinking they can just come into this country and make demands on us and we will give them what they want.
Then I went back and took a second look and had to rethink my thoughts on the subject. Because of the terrorist attacks on 09/11/2001 we have lost more than the 3,000 lives. We didn't stop there we went looking for the ring leader and have now lost over 3 times that amount. We should have saved those on the plane, because we have accomplished nothing but letting more innocent people die at the hands of terrorist.
So, in conclusion, I think I would have to say that policies are good for certain situations. But when it comes to saving lives the only policy there should be is to save lives. Give them what they want and we will deal with the others as they come about.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
RIght or Wrong????
Prompt:http://www.litmuse.net/prompt_right_wrong
Looking at this particular blog I didn't really know what I was until I took the time to look up the definitions of both. I now believe that I am a moral absolutist. I believe that there are some things that are morally wrong no matter what. My specific belief is that violence against children is morally wrong and there is no discussion that can be given regarding the subject. There is no excuse and that no matter what you are wrong, if you commit violence of any kind against a child.
Here is an example that I wanted to use because it was presented to me just today, a mother has four children from previous marriages. The new husband comes in and beats the oldest who happens to be a male, the only male of the group. The new husband is wrong to even think of laying his hands on the child. There is no excuse that could even begin to justify why you would willingly hurt an innocent child. All children are innocent. No moral values, morally wrong. The new husband knew that he was marrying all of the children when he married their mother. He took on the responsibility of raising those children as their father. So for him to even look at that child like he was not one of his own, is disgusting to me.
I am a firm believer that the mother of this child should also be in jail. She is also a child abuser to let this person come back into the house.
But on the other hand I can be a relativist on certain issues, I mean it really depends on the particular subject that is presented to you. I go to church on a regular basis, but I have a hard time with some of the beliefs of the church. With this homosexuality comes to mind. I don't believe I have the right to tell someone who they should love or be with. That would be like someone telling me that I shouldn't be with my husband because he chooses not to go to church. I love him just the same regardless. Just like I love my uncle who is homosexual. Let God be the one to judge them not me. I just don't have a problem with it.
I am who I am and that does not make my opinion of things wrong or right.
So the conclusion that I have come up with is that I can go either way depending on the subject of discussion that is presented to me.
Looking at this particular blog I didn't really know what I was until I took the time to look up the definitions of both. I now believe that I am a moral absolutist. I believe that there are some things that are morally wrong no matter what. My specific belief is that violence against children is morally wrong and there is no discussion that can be given regarding the subject. There is no excuse and that no matter what you are wrong, if you commit violence of any kind against a child.
Here is an example that I wanted to use because it was presented to me just today, a mother has four children from previous marriages. The new husband comes in and beats the oldest who happens to be a male, the only male of the group. The new husband is wrong to even think of laying his hands on the child. There is no excuse that could even begin to justify why you would willingly hurt an innocent child. All children are innocent. No moral values, morally wrong. The new husband knew that he was marrying all of the children when he married their mother. He took on the responsibility of raising those children as their father. So for him to even look at that child like he was not one of his own, is disgusting to me.
I am a firm believer that the mother of this child should also be in jail. She is also a child abuser to let this person come back into the house.
But on the other hand I can be a relativist on certain issues, I mean it really depends on the particular subject that is presented to you. I go to church on a regular basis, but I have a hard time with some of the beliefs of the church. With this homosexuality comes to mind. I don't believe I have the right to tell someone who they should love or be with. That would be like someone telling me that I shouldn't be with my husband because he chooses not to go to church. I love him just the same regardless. Just like I love my uncle who is homosexual. Let God be the one to judge them not me. I just don't have a problem with it.
I am who I am and that does not make my opinion of things wrong or right.
So the conclusion that I have come up with is that I can go either way depending on the subject of discussion that is presented to me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)