|
| |
|
Let's say someone came to your class to tell you about World War 2 (while it was still going on) it was this woman, who would kill others and work at a concentration camp and when someone (like a classmate) asked her how she could do such awful things she answered "Me and my husband want nice neighbours and friends, and we havn't been able to buy a house until now. If we just work there for 6 more months we'll be able to keep the house and invite our neighbours and have a normal life! After that we'll quit!" you'd pretty much think the woman was selfish right? I mean she's killing people for a nice house! But then your teacher would say something like "hey you can't judge people before you've been in their shoes, how can you decide waht's morally wrong or right if you havn't ever proven that you can go against everyone, follow your conscience, even if that means losing your career, future, friends, money or anything like that?!" what would you answer to that? or like AGAINST that - to show that we actually do have a right to say what's wrong or right even if we havn't been in the exact situation! Cause I really believe we do, like I KNOW IT'S WRONG TO KILL, so why can't I make that judgment and say "she was wrong, because she killed" ?! (link)
|
In a picture of a man shooting an unarmed man who is on there knees begging, who would you rather be?
Why is it morally wrong do you ask? Because she made a choice: she took the easy path when a hard path could have had the same outcome. Why is it wrong to do that: because it's cowardly.
tell your teacher: " it matters not what I would do, because I may be just as immoral as they are: my actions have little to do with the moral implications of an occurance."
|
|
