ABORTION? Save a thousand lives or one life.?

Question

You are out side two buildings, one building has a 25 year old lady and the other building is a nursing home with thousands of men and women who are lunatic (partialy aware or unaware of their suroundings) or dependant on machinery to continue living. Both buildings are on fire. You only have time to go into one building, do you go into the building and save the 25 year old lady or do you go into the building with the thousands of men and women? Which building contains the more valuable life/lives?

Please, explain your answers. Thank you for all and any answers.

Answer 1

you know i can't really answer your question. you put a new spin on abortion for me. Thanx.

Answer 2

The question is titled "ABORTION", in which case your situation is inaccurate. With the abortion case it's important to consider that if you're going to make a situtation to emblematize abortion, the individual/group representing the unborn should not be presented as a group/individual who has already experienced life outside the womb, whether they are semi-dependant or completely dependant on machinery to function.

The unborn is a fetus which hasn't experienced life outside the womb. While the mother forms a bond with the fetus as it's growing and developing inside the uterus, no other individuals have a chance to form a bond. I'm not talking about acknowledging it's presence and being eager for it's arrival to the born world, but having a relationship - a bond with it.

In your situation, the people who are dependant or semi-dependant on machines have already been born, and already formed relationships with their care-takers, family, or friends whether or not these beings are aware of their surroundings. When the fetus is born a baby, we don't see that child as an intelligent Human being who we have the chance to greet and converse with to either like or dislike, because a baby is incapable of having such conversations. In the womb, a fetus can't form the same relations as the other dependant beings can. Humans treat an infant, a baby, like a new toy; we think that all infants are cute and adorable, and we love them no matter what because they are so vulnerable and beautiful.

In such a case, it's more logical to save the life of the mother who has grown to the status of adult, and has her own life to support. If the mother were to carry the child to terms, her life as well as the child's may be in jeopardy due to insufficient funds.

Although I personally would never have an abortion, I don't condem others who would and have had abortions. I am proabortion even though I would never personally have the operation. I feel as though it's fair and righteous that others should have that option available. Even though it is the termination of a life, I believe it is the mother's responsibility to make all necessary and important decisions for the child - even if that means having the child clinically euthanized for protection from any difficulties or adversities the mother might experience during birth, or otherwise, that would effect the childs health.

My personal motto on the controversy of abortion:
If it's not my body or my child, I shouldn't interfere.

Answer 3

I would go into the building housing the 25 year old woman. Why? 1. I think I would stand a better chance of saving one person than trying to save many and failing.
2. The 25 year old might have children who have children and so on, so I might end up saving several generations of people and I wouldn't know how many that would be.

Answer 4

That's a really tough question. I think I'd have to go with the thousands of lives, even though every life is a gift. I base this on the number of people involved only - not that the 25 year old is any less valuable than the infirm.

Answer 5

Always women and children first, as cruel as it may sound the younger woman is more "valuable" because she might be able to procreate and continue to give life; that is if she has a mate. Another thing, if I have enough time to save the thousands why I only have time to go to one building, why can I go save the woman and save 500 of the 1000?

Answer 6

I would save a thousand lives. Even though they are lunatics or depend on machines to live, they still may have families and children that need their mothers and fathers. It will cause society a much bigger problem if the 1,000 die than if the one dies. The one 25 year old also has a better chance of saving herself than the 1,000 people.

Answer 7

good question, lol. However each person is a spirit and contributes to the earth, so probably the 1000's of lives. Yet, sigh, I would probably save the 25 year old as she has a better quality of life, and maybe next time around, the 1000 will have a better go of it.

Answer 8

Well, if I am the only person onscene, it makes sense for me to save the 25 year old lady since I would be the only one there.. if I were to go to the nursing home, how would I be able to choose who gets saved and who doesn't?

By the way, what does this question have to do with ABORTION???

Answer 9

Why would anyone risk his life to save a lunatic?

Better to let them burn and get it over with. Whether I would risk my life to save a 25 year old woman depends on what she looks like and how she comes across.

If she comes across as being a b**ch, I'd just go on my way and call the fire department when I got where I was going.

Answer 10

thousands of men and women? then i guess i would have to save them.

but if they were decrepted, relying on machinery to survive, then would it be worth it?

and what if the 25 yr old girl was hot?

i would save the old ppl, better 1 funeral than 1000.

but how come i can save 1000 ppl but not have time to save 1001?

Answer 11

well i would save the 25 yearold cause first of all she is young and it wil be more posible for her to survive than the other people that are lunatic and who knows, maybe that same 25 yearsold lady would save people some day cuse she hass more probability of living.