Ethical question about rape...
 

The other night, seen “28 days after” with my girlfriend. I’ll spare you guys the movie details, as having spoiler info could make less people give their opinions… but anyway, this ethical question has arisen in our afterwards conversation:

In a situation where there is only, say, 50 fertile women left in the world, would it be within such women’s rights, for whatever reason, to decide not to have children, or would it be their duty to bare as many children as they could manage to during their life, in the interest of preserving the human species?

And then there is the real trick question… if they decide not to have children… would it be acceptable that people forced them to? And when I say force, I mean resorting to every way available, regardless how unethical, including rape?

What is the ethical limit of the rights of the disposition of a person over his/her own body? In what moment, if any, would such terrible violence be acceptable over the legitimate free will, the rightful freedom of a person, in the interest of the human race? And if so would there be limits? And what limits?

that would depend on the morals of the remaining 50 people
and hey, even if they didnt like it, its only 49 people that hate you

There's a tendency to say that what's right is right and what's wrong is wrong -- unless survival is at stake. But if the only way to survive is to make yourself less than you are -- say, by condoning rape -- I'd say, maybe your line should die.

i think that they have a morla obligation to bear children, but i dont think that it would be right to force them too. It would happen anyway though, regardless of morals, i dont believe that the geans(sp?) we are born with affect our personalities very much, but if there is one instinct that we do have, that we fairly obviously have, its survival of the human species. Our deepest, most primitive desire is to mate, to procreate, to continue this human race and make it stronger and better. So, with 50 people left, regardless of the peoples disposition, they probably will bear children, of the woman chooses not to bear them, i would try my best to defy my body, but not everyone would do so.

I believe it'd be more of an issue of convincing said women that it's necessary. I believe that'd be possible over time. If not, there's still 49 other women to try your luck with.

my very first thought on seeing that thread title was a George Carlin routine....

Rape is rape, no matter how you try to justify it.

if there are 50 women, then there are enough to gain choice. I doubt all 50 would be against the idea of being "Eve" if some were, then try persuasion. If they still dont want to, then fine. Then her lack of children will be the death of her dna. If there are so few people left, then the importance of right and wrong and morals will be decided by those few.

Is there a moral imperative to perpetuate the human race? Where is it written that if the human race gets down to its last 50 souls, its our job to make more humans?

Fuck that.

Yep, rape is rape.

But given the circumstances - you and 50 women left in the world - the survival of the human race at stake. Some calling.

You'd be rather pissed off if all 50 women gave birth to girls.

Well id that u have to do wat u gotta do... In this situation u need to prolong the human race this is survival. Im not sayin rape is good in any which way but im also sayin the end of man kind is not a good thingb either ... So this definetely a tough subject to comment on!!

Then i guess we'd be assessing the moral implications of incest...

Does the date rape drug exist in this scenario? Do police exist?

It's not rape if she doesn't remember it, right?
It's also not rape unless you get caught, right?

When girls say "no" they really mean "yes".

NOT that I would ever do it. I would Jedi Mind Trick them and use the force.

Ok, ok, in all seriousness...rape is about power and control and it is a very serious crime. But something that may seem more serious at the time is keeping the human race in existence.

It seems like they would want to all keep the race in existence no matter how ugly you were. But, if they were that much against it...who is to say that they wouldn't try to kil the baby in the 9 months of pregnancy?

I must really be bored answering this shit...on to something else.

oops, am I aloud to say "shit"? That was my first post. Also, how about my favorite word "fuck"? Are people STILL offended by such great words? Or have we gotten over it?

Survival of the species is more important than the "feelings" of the last remaining humans. I can't imagine that any of the last 50 women would not understand that.

Yes.

I would do it, this question is a bit of a paradox in the same sense as asking if it was moral to nuke nagasaki and hiroshima in order to save more lives then we killed. Would I feel bad doing it? Yup. Does it need to be done? Yup.

If rape is necessary for the human race to survive, then the human race will not be missed.
Whatever grand scheme it is necessary for, it can never be grand enough.

You'd be suprised at the things people have done to "survive". Like the guy who recently sawed his own arm with a dull pocket knife off when he got it caught under a boulder in the middle of nowhere.

People have done much worse...I'm sure you can imagine. Some civilizations and religions have broken every law towards humanity (rape, murder, torture, etc.) just to stay in power.

It's not only morally right to do it...we are obligated to do it.

Your quote about guns....I like. But, if you think about it, if we didn't have guns murder and war and crimes would just me more gruesome....ever seen the movie Braveheart?

I'd rather be shot than hit with a battle ax or some of those weapons. Guns are a nice quick death. There are worse things then death. Of course, I guess you can be shot and still live and/or die slow by getting shot too.

Slow deaths suck.

When it comes down to it, humans are merely animals, nothing more.

If it's for the greater good of the human race I doubt that all fifty woman would be overly opposed to submitting.

I think the scenario is far too hypothetical to even make it worth thinking about.

I'd think it'd depend on supplies. For instance, if she wouldn't reproduce, we'd have more of a problem justifying providing her with protection and food. If she still doesn't want to, we've eliminated her stubborn, stupid genes from the pool.

How could they justify their feelings. "I'm not ready to be a mom." or "Let's get to know each other first" certinly wouln't cut it in my book. I don't think it would come to the point where you'd have to rape them, but like denim said, it'll just make for a cleaner gene pool.

maybe we'd be lucky and they would reproduce all by themselves ala Jurassic Park...

It seems like most folks in this discussion think there is a moral directive to preserve our species. Does this apply to other animals as well? Would you commit rape if, for example, it would somehow prevent the extinction of the California Condor?

Given that none of us are a condor, I figure that's a bogus question.

I think so. I think it is a great tragedy and a shame for any species to become extinct due to the carelessness of an intelligent species such as humans.

It's a shame the way we reproduce and overpopulate and over use our resources in a greedy manor...in such a thoughtless, unconsicous way that another beautiful, God-created species has to die off altogether.

In my humble opinion, it is very evil when genocide of another species weaker than us has to die because we want to use more than we should.

Some of us have evolved...but, most of us are reproducing like we still don't realize their IS NOT ENOUGH FUCKING RESOURCES. A few of us are using birth control. However, the ghetto mother fuckers and third world nations have just not caught on yet.

The more we overpopulate, the shittier the quality of life is per person.

Unfortunately, war, disease and natural disasters are the universe's only way to cleanse itself of our filth.

We need to evolve as a society and think as a higher consciousness for this to stop.

if we ever result to rape to forego our species then I pray we go extinct. fast.

No, just no.

It is not an individuals place to 'ensure' the survival of our species through rape. Nobody has an obligation to bear children, even if that means you won't be able to father any.

This thread reminds me of Dr. Strangelove....

Hang on a minute, what real grounds do anyone have for claiming that the survival of the species is paramount above the needs and desires of the individual? So the human race will die out, big deal. The world is made of individuals. You have obligations to yourself and those you interact with first and foremost. The end of the species is no direct harm to any individual so I fail to see how you could claim that not reproducing harms anyone.

And to say that its a moral duty is just plain moronic. Morals are subjective. If you agree with that you're allowing one individual's moral values to supercede that of others, and thats not acceptable.

tracer bullet: actually, the whole individuals thing is a very *very* recent fenomenon. Up until not that long ago, there were a few individuals, but most of them were masses, no matter how you look at it.
Morals and values of the individual are again a recent phenomenon. They are in reality a luxury we have these days because of a general welfare, civilisation and technology.

If you take that all away, most human will easily slump back to previous forms of living.

The survival of the species is not a moral duty, it's beyond that, it's a natural urge, an instinct. If it really came to it, that instinct would kick in I'm sure.
I don't know whether any woman would refuse it, and if she did, I'm pretty sure the others would peer-pressure her into it.

In both cases it was wrong...

Rape is rape and like many here there is nothing that says the human race must survive... and if there was who'd want it to be populated in such a manner.

As for Hiroshima and Nagisaki... it wasn't neccessary. They could have left the Japanese with the territories they had and called for a cessation of war... They *might* have been open to the idea. (sorry didn't mean to hijack the thread)

Manslow's Hiarirarchy of Needs (spelling)

The base comes first. It does not matter if you need food if you don't have air, as such it does not matter if you don't have the spreading of the race, free-will does not matter...

Reikes: never heard of that one, but I totally agree with you.

Hierarchy of Needs probably. Should look into that Manslow-character, any info on him?

Fuck this...you guys are a bunch of fuckin fruit cakes...acting like rape is so horrible that you would rather see the extinction of the human race.


I would take great pleasure in raping the hell out of a dumb bitch that didn't think it was necessary for the human species to exist any longer because of her selfish ways.

I would violently fuck the hell out of each and every single one of them - six ways, sideways...24 hours a day, doggie style, wheel barrow, donkey punch and all...and then spit on them for being so stupid.

That'll teach them to question the importance of the human race's survival.

It almost offends me that others think its not important, but then I realize that it is just a crazy hypothetical question in a forum and they are just trying to be "politically correct" and impress others with the answers they think others want to hear.

My personal opinion is that you don't have sex unless you're invited too, regardless of the circumstances.

As men, we don't have the right to just "take" what we want. It's not right, or we might as well be mindless animals too. We call ourselves civilized for a reason right?

Who the fuck are you? You do realize you've made yourself look about 10,000 times less of a person. I will now ignore everything you say.

You're a fucking idiot. You wouldnt live to "rape the hell out of a dumb bitch".

Re: Ethical question about rape...
 

NO never. They have a "Duty" to do so, as much as they have a Choice not to.

Are you the same one that says you are as American as SERIAL KILLERS?

Hmmm....whatever makes you feel better.

Ignorance is bliss. I'm sure you have ingored great opinions all of your life.

Stop posting answers you think will make others happy. Post what you really feel - you fall in line like a fuckin robot...you are exactly what society wants you to be....playing your role.

FREE YOURSELF! LET IT OUT! IT FEELS GOOD!

And I would take great pleasure in making sure you never touched another human being again, let alone a woman. If the only way your genes can survive is through rape, then maybe it'd be best if your genes died.