Total Posts:104|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

If you see a child about to be rape....

izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2011 9:20:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Is it your duty as a moral being to do something if you can?
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2011 9:40:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Not generally. Contracts can change this.

Of course, it's not possible for a child to be rape. A child can be a rapist, or be raped... but a child cannot be rape.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2011 9:42:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/7/2011 9:40:08 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Not generally. Contracts can change this.

Of course, it's not possible for a child to be rape. A child can be a rapist, or be raped... but a child cannot be rape.

you got the point, what contract would change this especially since I specified if you can.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Andromeda_Z
Posts: 4,151
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2011 9:44:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/7/2011 9:20:41 PM, izbo10 wrote:
Is it your duty as a moral being to do something if you can?

I assume you are talking about a child being raped, not rape? I think that would depend on the system of morals you are using, because they don't say the same thing.
el-badgero
Posts: 1,045
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2011 9:49:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/7/2011 9:40:08 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Not generally. Contracts can change this.

heartless bastard!

Of course, it's not possible for a child to be rape. A child can be a rapist, or be raped... but a child cannot be rape.
DATCMOTO's moustache makes him look like an eejit...

edit: nah, i'm jealous... God's an eejit definitely though!
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2011 10:05:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/7/2011 9:44:06 PM, Andromeda_Z wrote:
At 7/7/2011 9:20:41 PM, izbo10 wrote:
Is it your duty as a moral being to do something if you can?

I assume you are talking about a child being raped, not rape? I think that would depend on the system of morals you are using, because they don't say the same thing.

any modern sense of morality in this century. I don't think it makes a difference.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Andromeda_Z
Posts: 4,151
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2011 10:11:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/7/2011 10:05:57 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 7/7/2011 9:44:06 PM, Andromeda_Z wrote:
At 7/7/2011 9:20:41 PM, izbo10 wrote:
Is it your duty as a moral being to do something if you can?

I assume you are talking about a child being raped, not rape? I think that would depend on the system of morals you are using, because they don't say the same thing.

any modern sense of morality in this century. I don't think it makes a difference.

It does make a difference. A moral nihilist would answer this differently from a consequentialist, for example. What morals are you trying to apply to this scenario?
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2011 10:55:12 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/7/2011 10:11:19 PM, Andromeda_Z wrote:
At 7/7/2011 10:05:57 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 7/7/2011 9:44:06 PM, Andromeda_Z wrote:
At 7/7/2011 9:20:41 PM, izbo10 wrote:
Is it your duty as a moral being to do something if you can?

I assume you are talking about a child being raped, not rape? I think that would depend on the system of morals you are using, because they don't say the same thing.

any modern sense of morality in this century. I don't think it makes a difference.

It does make a difference. A moral nihilist would answer this differently from a consequentialist, for example. What morals are you trying to apply to this scenario?

name one moral system that will allow a child to be raped when you can stop it without harm, and ill show you a failed moral system.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2011 11:05:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/7/2011 9:42:59 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 7/7/2011 9:40:08 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Not generally. Contracts can change this.

Of course, it's not possible for a child to be rape. A child can be a rapist, or be raped... but a child cannot be rape.

what contract would change this
One that says "I agree to do something about this child being raped if I can."

especially since I specified if you can.
Irrelevant. If you see a child about to not be raped, is it your moral duty to rape them, if you can? Ability to do a thing does not imply duty to.

name one moral system that will allow a child to be raped when you can stop it without harm, and ill show you a failed moral system.
Egoism.
Remember, show, don't tell.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Andromeda_Z
Posts: 4,151
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2011 11:09:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/7/2011 10:55:12 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 7/7/2011 10:11:19 PM, Andromeda_Z wrote:
At 7/7/2011 10:05:57 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 7/7/2011 9:44:06 PM, Andromeda_Z wrote:
At 7/7/2011 9:20:41 PM, izbo10 wrote:
Is it your duty as a moral being to do something if you can?

I assume you are talking about a child being raped, not rape? I think that would depend on the system of morals you are using, because they don't say the same thing.

any modern sense of morality in this century. I don't think it makes a difference.

It does make a difference. A moral nihilist would answer this differently from a consequentialist, for example. What morals are you trying to apply to this scenario?


name one moral system that will allow a child to be raped when you can stop it without harm, and ill show you a failed moral system.

That doesn't answer my question.
quarterexchange
Posts: 1,549
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2011 11:17:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Now I'm sort of with Darkkermit.

I'm punk 16 year old kid, I'd probably just call the cops rather than confront someone deranged enough to rape a child.
I don't discriminate....I hate everybody.
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2011 11:21:40 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/7/2011 9:40:08 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Not generally. Contracts can change this.

Of course, it's not possible for a child to be rape. A child can be a rapist, or be raped... but a child cannot be rape.

Not generally, or "no?"

What if the child getting raped was your son, and a bystander had a chance to stop it but was running late for his coffee break and decided against it? Lets say the perpetrator was a 5'2, 100 lb. 15 year old problem child who the potential hero could have stopped with the flick of a wrist. If you concede that he has no duty, how logical is it for you to get mad at him?
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2011 11:43:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/7/2011 11:17:46 PM, quarterexchange wrote:
Now I'm sort of with Darkkermit.

I'm punk 16 year old kid, I'd probably just call the cops rather than confront someone deranged enough to rape a child.
But you would still feel obliged to do something. That is the point here, maybe i should have specified, that this example is if you have no chance of being another victim, not meaning being raped but having harm occur to you.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2011 11:47:55 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/7/2011 11:21:40 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 7/7/2011 9:40:08 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Not generally. Contracts can change this.

Of course, it's not possible for a child to be rape. A child can be a rapist, or be raped... but a child cannot be rape.

Not generally, or "no?"
See the "contracts can change this."


What if the child getting raped was your son, and a bystander had a chance to stop it but was running late for his coffee break and decided against it?
Then I wouldn't like that bystander (assuming I liked my son). That doesn't mean he was doing something immoral.

If you concede that he has no duty, how logical is it for you to get mad at him?
Why is duty a necessary condition of being pissed off at someone? :P.

Although frankly I would be a bit too busy being pissed off at the rapist instead.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Rockylightning
Posts: 2,862
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2011 11:56:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
In the real world I would probably call the cops or do something if the rapist didnt look dangerous (then again I'm short..so nvm...)

In the philosophical world it depends on what morals you go by. What if raping a child was a custom in your society? Would you still stop the rapist? No. It all depends.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2011 12:33:33 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/7/2011 11:43:19 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 7/7/2011 11:17:46 PM, quarterexchange wrote:
Now I'm sort of with Darkkermit.

I'm punk 16 year old kid, I'd probably just call the cops rather than confront someone deranged enough to rape a child.
But you would still feel obliged to do something. That is the point here, maybe i should have specified, that this example is if you have no chance of being another victim, not meaning being raped but having harm occur to you.

The main issue I was addressing is that to do action X requires either a risk or opportunity cost loss.

I would value to see that the child was not raped. However, such action can either be a risk or an opportunity cost loss. Let's say another scenario occurs in which If I need to be somewhere, and If I am not there then there will be a negative consequence. Will, in that scenario I again would have to weight the opportunities.

However, no, I do not believe that one has a moral obligation to save the child from rape.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
quarterexchange
Posts: 1,549
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2011 12:37:37 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/7/2011 11:43:19 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 7/7/2011 11:17:46 PM, quarterexchange wrote:
Now I'm sort of with Darkkermit.

I'm punk 16 year old kid, I'd probably just call the cops rather than confront someone deranged enough to rape a child.
But you would still feel obliged to do something. That is the point here, maybe i should have specified, that this example is if you have no chance of being another victim, not meaning being raped but having harm occur to you.

Oh absolutely. I'd call the police. If the rapist was my age and we are assuming the rapist is unarmed, then I'd become physically involved.
I don't discriminate....I hate everybody.
Andromeda_Z
Posts: 4,151
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2011 12:43:15 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/7/2011 11:43:19 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 7/7/2011 11:17:46 PM, quarterexchange wrote:
Now I'm sort of with Darkkermit.

I'm punk 16 year old kid, I'd probably just call the cops rather than confront someone deranged enough to rape a child.
But you would still feel obliged to do something. That is the point here, maybe i should have specified, that this example is if you have no chance of being another victim, not meaning being raped but having harm occur to you.

In this case, I still don't see a basis on which to assert that there is a moral obligation to help. The lack of a moral obligation does not mean I won't help the child. I'd attack the rapist if I thought I could take him in a fight. Otherwise, I'd just call the police.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2011 1:00:14 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
It is my desire as a decent human being. Morals have only served as a barrier to good will. We shouldn't need rules to do what is caring.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2011 2:16:27 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Then I wouldn't like that bystander (assuming I liked my son). That doesn't mean he was doing something immoral.

Fair enough. What if he raped and then killed your son, while the bystander watched and smoked a cigarette? I mean, he never signed a contract saying he couldn't do so. How can you be mad at him if he never did anything wrong? You being mad at him is absurd, because he's not guilty of anything.

Why is duty a necessary condition of being pissed off at someone? :P.

Although frankly I would be a bit too busy being pissed off at the rapist instead.

Look, all failures of duty don't necessitate anger. What you're doing here is basically writing off the concept of duty entirely, unless perhaps if it is contract bound - but how many of us have a contract-bound morality?
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2011 2:24:20 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/7/2011 9:40:08 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Not generally. Contracts can change this.

Of course, it's not possible for a child to be rape. A child can be a rapist, or be raped... but a child cannot be rape.

What if a child was surgically altered, the two hemispheres of its brain seperated, the body warped, so that it could... (and for the sake of argument would) rape itself. In this way the child would be the rapist, would be getting raped, but would also possibly be rape.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2011 2:27:28 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/8/2011 12:43:15 AM, Andromeda_Z wrote:
At 7/7/2011 11:43:19 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 7/7/2011 11:17:46 PM, quarterexchange wrote:
Now I'm sort of with Darkkermit.

I'm punk 16 year old kid, I'd probably just call the cops rather than confront someone deranged enough to rape a child.
But you would still feel obliged to do something. That is the point here, maybe i should have specified, that this example is if you have no chance of being another victim, not meaning being raped but having harm occur to you.

In this case, I still don't see a basis on which to assert that there is a moral obligation to help. The lack of a moral obligation does not mean I won't help the child. I'd attack the rapist if I thought I could take him in a fight. Otherwise, I'd just call the police.

Moral obligations serve as a counter to moral transgressions or moral problems. If you don't assert you have a moral obligation to help here, it would seem like you would be in the wrong for initiating force against a fellow person doing an act that you have no moral obligation to correct. On what basis can you rightfully attack the perpetrator once you give him the moral green light?
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2011 2:55:59 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/7/2011 9:20:41 PM, izbo10 wrote:
Is it your duty as a moral being to do something if you can?

I might be tempted to stop the rape, but then I would ask myself what would Jesus do ? And as evangelicals tell me, God allows things like this to happen because of free will. So I wouldn't do anything cause I wouldn't want to interfere in the rapists free will, so just like God I would do...........absolutely nothing.

There I said it, come get some.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2011 3:26:46 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'm no moral philosopher, but yes, any decent person should feel compelled to intervene to stop anyone being raped if they are able to do so.

At 7/8/2011 2:24:20 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 7/7/2011 9:40:08 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:

Of course, it's not possible for a child to be rape. A child can be a rapist, or be raped... but a child cannot be rape.

What if a child was surgically altered, the two hemispheres of its brain seperated, the body warped, so that it could... (and for the sake of argument would) rape itself. In this way the child would be the rapist, would be getting raped, but would also possibly be rape.

ha ha you funny sick bastard :)
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2011 3:58:55 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/8/2011 2:24:20 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
What if a child was surgically altered, the two hemispheres of its brain seperated, the body warped, so that it could... (and for the sake of argument would) rape itself. In this way the child would be the rapist, would be getting raped, but would also possibly be rape.

That was hilarious and disturbing.
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2011 1:07:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Although my view can be refuted or incorrect, I do not think that it is a purely moral obligation or right to stop a child from being raped, especially considering the fact that rights are nonexistent: they are ascribed to us, given, but are not inherent. Yes, one can say that morals are necessary, but they are not definite characters of the human condition.

And now, just to answer the question, I would like to point out that it depends on the scenario, and on the person in the scenario. Some might call or alert the police, or neighbors, to chase the rapist away; others might be physically involved with the rapist, but on only certain conditions--if the rapist is unarmed, or at least with similar physical build as the person in question, or if the person who is being raped is a relative or close on. Therefore, the situation needs to be specific in order for me to give a definite answer.
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
BennyW
Posts: 698
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2011 1:40:40 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I think I agree with izbo for once. We are morally obligated to do something, if not actively going out there we should call the police. If you don't do anything you are partially to blame. Just because another society says raping kids is right does not make it so. I would be willing to debate someone on this but not for two weeks as I will be going on vacation.
You didn't build that-Obama
It's pretty lazy to quote things you disagree with, call it stupid and move on, rather than arguing with the person. -000ike