Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

reusrename

(1,716 posts)

2. The fire may be cause by arson or accident, but the morality of rescuing the baby does not change.

Reply to Shankapotomus (Reply #1)

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 07:51 AM

Jun 2013

The analogy allows a very clear way to separate the legal and moral questions.

In the Snowden case, there is also an ethical question related to perjury, which can add a little more complexity to the situation.

If there is even a whiff of evidence that the govt. is intentionally burning babies, then there is no choice, IMHO.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

9 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The burning baby scenario. [View all] reusrename Jun 2013 OP

Playing devil's advocate Shankapotomus Jun 2013 #1

The fire may be cause by arson or accident, but the morality of rescuing the baby does not change. reusrename Jun 2013 #2

and if the person who saved the baby turns out to be a pedophile OKNancy Jun 2013 #3

And then flees with the baby to Hong Kong Progressive dog Jun 2013 #4

This is a great post. reusrename Jun 2013 #6

excellent. we don't know who the 'hero' is, do we? Whisp Jun 2013 #8

But if there was no baby, and it was just a story made up by the perp as a cover story... MH1 Jun 2013 #5

Yeah, sure, but in this particular case we already know there was a baby. reusrename Jun 2013 #7

This scenario is easily flipped in the other direction. pnwmom Jun 2013 #9