I have a curious question on just how much anyone [All people] love others.
All of this is hypothetical absolutes. You cannot say, "I'd feed him grass," or anything, as you have two choices; yes, or no.
If you were with a starving child, and the literal only thing you can feed it is a chunk of your own flesh, from your arm. You don't need to take more than 6 ounces off, but you have to remove it yourself. Would you remove the flesh from your body [You have a sharp knife.] to save the child's life, despite the fact this is cannibalism?
If you object, why? Is it a religious objection, or just your selfishness?
Thanks.
2007-03-13 13:33:23 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
To be honest - I have to admit that no, I wouldn't. Not because I think it's wrong or that I'm selfish. To be honest - I'm not fond of pain and that much blood would make me freak out. I don't think I have the bravery to cut myself like that either.
I also have to say that I wonder how many people who said they would, if faced with this as an actual situation, would really do it. It's easy to say, "Yeah, I'd do that in a heartbeat." But would you - really? I think most of us would look for another way out of the situation and only do something like this as a desperate last resort. And only those who had the courage to cut themselves up would in the end. And my guess is that's a small percentage of people. :)
2007-03-13 13:39:27 · answer #1 · answered by swordarkeereon 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I've put mine on the line more than once to save others. If that were the case the blood is a better source of nutrition than the flesh and easier to regenerate. It would be an extremely rare situation where that scenario would be likely though. The only place I can think of would be the Arctic or deep desert and deserts have bugs. With out water death would come much faster than without food. Not very realistic.
2007-03-13 13:43:44 · answer #2 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes I would save that child by cutting a chunk of my flesh for that child to survive.
2007-03-13 13:37:08 · answer #3 · answered by tebone0315 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No meistro.
It 6 onces wouldnt help at all, and I might die first because of uncontrolled bleeding.
To know your limitations is an important part of both a religious person`s life, and of medicine.
Otherwise you do more harm than good.
2007-03-13 14:22:48 · answer #4 · answered by the good guy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes, because a childs life is worrth that bit of pain .I would also hypnotize the child so he wouldnt be traumatized after having had to watch me cut out a chunk of my arm, and realizing that he just ate it! where do you get this?
2007-03-13 13:39:03 · answer #5 · answered by mna 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No I would not. Self-preservation. Call me selfish, but I am not hacking off a piece of my body to feed someone else.
2007-03-13 14:07:02 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I knew there was a reason I always carry peppermints in my purse.
Yes to your question. Whatever it took to save the child.
2007-03-13 13:41:29 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah. It's just a small chunk of arm. Even if it doesn't grow back, it would be fine. I say yes.
2007-03-13 13:41:27 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Undoubtedly. In fact, if it would TRULY save the world and bring peace I would not hesitate to be crucified this very hour.
Pagan Rationalist
2007-03-13 13:39:11 · answer #9 · answered by Medusa 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"There is no greater love than this: that a man lay down his life for a friend"
"Suffer the little children to come unto me"
"She stretcheth out her hand to the poor; yea, she reacheth forth her hands to the needy"
"Love has the power of undergoing all things, having faith in all things, hoping all things."
This is what I hear in my soul when I read your question; so there is my answer.
2007-03-13 13:42:23 · answer #10 · answered by arewethereyet 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋