2006-12-06 05:15:23 · 16 answers · asked by A True Gentleman 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
If British Politicians cared about your life, why can't they be bothered to stop murders being released after two or three years?
2006-12-06 05:35:12 · update #1
If they were drowning in my beer, then yes - obviously.
If they were drowning in my pond, well - only if I'd be tasked with cleaning up after them.
If they were drowning in the sea, I'd call the firebrigade. I'm not getting wet for no one!
2006-12-06 05:20:37 · answer #1 · answered by Sassysaz 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I've read all the answers and each hasmerits, I am intrigued by the bluntness of this question, I would say a politician is a politician, British, American or Iraqi for that matter.
Well since you want to know about the sympathy for or against a drowning british politician, I would say, "YES".
It is not because of my love for the job which they don't do well, or for the lies which they have so perfected their acts in...
I would, for the same reason a doctor would save the life of a murderer, just to have his day in the dock.
2006-12-06 14:07:55 · answer #2 · answered by DubbySquared 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you mean literally drowning in water or drowning as a metaphor for the sinking feeling associated with their personal nemesis at the hands of the press or public opinion?
Everyone makes mistakes. But the biggest mistake is allowing individuals to serve in a cultural/political system that grooms the worst in human nature and not the best. The grooming starts at Infant School.
I have pity for a politician who drowns in his political vomit but I have no pity for the system he or she commits to knowing it is corrupt and in need of a major over haul. In one sense 'it serves them right' for signing up to secrecy in a system that hides the truth, and in another there is the benefit of doubt for the naive who think they can 'change the system'.
If you mean literal drowning, which I doubt, because a British Politician doesn't drown that frequently to warrant thinking about the implied moral obligations of my reaction if he or she did, then the answer is NO. I jest of course.
To errr is human but to swim fully clothed with the cognizance of endemic corruption is spiritual deception.
2006-12-06 13:43:23 · answer #3 · answered by forgetful 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This isn't a political question. It's an ethics question. But yes I would save someone from drowning, even if that person had been Hitler. (Although, in Hitlers case (if it was after his atrocities) I would do it to make him stand trial for his crimes against humanity.)
2006-12-06 13:23:11 · answer #4 · answered by Mikira 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, but purely because it was a human being drowning and you can't let any person die if it's in your power to save them. However I'd contemplate giving them a kick once we'd got to shore!
2006-12-06 13:24:35 · answer #5 · answered by Cardinal Fang 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
As it happens, I cannot swim, and while I have always bemoaned the fact that I swim like an Elephant in an iron safe, this is the first tme I have been happy that I cannot swim a stroke.
Mind you, if it was a she, with big ti t s, then we could go down together.
2006-12-09 09:46:04 · answer #6 · answered by manforallseasons 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not if he was a socialist or a liberal. They would be so full of hot air that they would float for hours. Anyway, they believe in equality to such an extent, that he would think it only fair that I drown with him.
2006-12-06 13:18:41 · answer #7 · answered by Veritas 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I'ts an automatic reaction to save anybody that's drowning, however apart from family and friends I don't suppose anyone would miss them if you didn't.
2006-12-06 13:30:03 · answer #8 · answered by Cowboy 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I would save anybody from drowing as presumably I would not know who they were and in principle everyone has a right to live.
2006-12-06 13:18:41 · answer #9 · answered by Stephanie C 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!
2006-12-08 05:43:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋