If you were a jew, with a group of 99 other jews in a Nazi infested forest...(during the holocost)...and you had a baby. If the baby cried, the Nazis would find you, and kill all 100 people...so would you kill the baby to save 100 lives, or would you let the baby live, only to know that you could've saved 99 other jews from the nazis? To kill the baby, or not to kill the baby?...
2007-03-30 17:29:33 · 23 answers · asked by CoolChad15 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Someone once asked me this question, and i really was undecided at first, but after thinking about it for a very long time, I personally do not think I could kill the baby. I ask it on here to see what everyone else would say...that's all, not make it seem like Jew's are worse than Nazi's, (shibboleth)...I'm not a sick and twisted person like that, i just wanted to know what others thought...
2007-03-30 17:40:45 · update #1
I wouldn't kill it. I know this sounds horrible, but those 99 Jewish prisoners were at least able to live, grow and experience life. Even though their death's would leave a giant hole in the lives they touched, to deny this baby the opportunity to experience what makes life great and to have the opportunity to touch someone elses life, makes killing it even more of a crime. There's also the possibility that the baby wouldn't be detected. Nothing is absolutely certain, even my belief in god, or lack there of, isn't set in stone.
2007-03-31 00:13:44 · answer #1 · answered by manbearpig 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The only reason this is hard to answer is because your asking me to imagine being a Jew, I have no idea what its like to be a Jew or what the morality system of a Jew is.
However as I am if it was a choice between 99 lives or one, then I of course would choose the 99 and kill the baby. Unless of course my life wasn't at stake, in which case I would judge the 99 people and if I found them unworthy of existence I would allow all 100 people to be killed.
2007-03-31 08:55:17 · answer #2 · answered by UnTrace 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually I've thought long and hard about the dilemma of whether to save a child at the cost of my own life, conversely as well whether I would risk my life for that of an elder.
I came up with a logical solution.
I am older than the baby, I have seen more, lived more, processed more, I have touched lives, I will be remembered even in a small way. I would die to save a baby, or one younger than myself, because of the potential that they will have if given life. Even if they only live to the age I am now, they'll still get to process more, live more, touch lives, and be remembered.
Conversely, if I could save myself or save an elder, I would simply let the elder die. The reason is again, they've lived longer, they will be remembered.
It also has to do with average life expectancy. An elder is closest to death, so they should be more willing to die. I as an intermediary, should be the next one willing to die. The baby has the most amount of time ahead, it should live at most costs.
Hope this made sense.
2007-03-30 18:19:33 · answer #3 · answered by Luis 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Logically, the baby should be quieted, hopefully not killed. But what a gory question. Did you know that this actually happened during that time? The child was accidentally smothered while keeping it quiet. Probably more times than we know.
Don't try to use this scenario to justify abortion to save the planet or something bizarre. Not the same thing at all.
2007-03-30 17:37:25 · answer #4 · answered by howdigethere 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Everyone tried to save the children during the Holocaust. Some children hid under dead bodies, others were adopted by non Jewish people and passed off as their own. Some were hidden in Catholic convents and schools.
When a group of people is ruthlessly murdered, they all want the children to be spared.
2007-03-30 17:34:58 · answer #5 · answered by Eartha Q 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Is this some sick, twisted way of making the Jews look worse than the Nazis?
2007-03-30 17:34:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
I'd let the group go on without me and my child and let the Nazi's decide what to do with us. Therefore, I would not sacrifice the group, nor kill my baby.
2007-03-30 17:33:47 · answer #7 · answered by Medusa 5 · 6⤊ 0⤋
I would separate my baby and myself away from the others and take our chances. I would die with my baby, and save the lives of the 99 others.
2007-03-31 00:34:34 · answer #8 · answered by Pamela V 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I could neither kill the baby nor endanger the others lives. I would separate myself from the others and pray that I could keep my baby happy and myself concealed.
2007-03-30 17:57:58 · answer #9 · answered by Sparkle1 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I'm sure that that situation really did happen. I would have had to be killed myself rather than to kill my own baby. I would tell the others that I would leave with my child and try to make it on my own if it was possible. If they insisted on killing my baby, they would have to kill me too.
2007-03-30 17:34:56 · answer #10 · answered by 4HIM- Christians love 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋