Quote:
Originally posted by Cynthetiq
Imagine during any armed conflict that some family is hiding. Baby cries because it is being restrained and in the act of trying to quiet the child, the child is smothered. Had the child cried out surely the family would have been discovered and all of them killed. But the act of smothering the child saved the rest of the family.
|
This exact scenario was included in the recent Bruce Willis movie "Tears of the Sun" (though I don't think they actually killed the child).
Quote:
Originally posted by Cynthetiq
IMHO I find that it depends on each and every situation. There isn't a cut and dry method for determining which is more important the many or the one.
|
That about says it all. If you are talking about the lives of countless other human beings being saved if one or a handful dies then clearly the many outweighs the few. A terrible decision? Absolutely, but sometimes practical decisions need to be made.
It really boils down to the definition of "need". Saving lives is a need. A majority wanted to discriminate against a minority is only a "want" which should be resisted at all costs. In that type of situation the desires of the many surely do not outweight the desires of the few.