If you had to save either a Jewish child, Muslim child, Christian child, Hindu child, or Atheist child from drowning, and you could only save one, which would you save?
2007-04-28 17:40:16 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
There are a list of variables Who is closest--who is the weakest can I save two close together--I was a lifeguard a long time ago. Labels would not matter.
2007-04-28 18:04:11 · answer #1 · answered by j.wisdom 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
That is a loaded question and I see only the atheists swallowed the bait.
Is this a calm pool or a raging river in which these hapless little ones are floundering? I would not think, I would just ACT.
Life matters, not religious affiliation under such circumstances and, presuming my own child was not one of them, I would take the ones I knew I could save. My kid there? She would have priority but I would grab as many as I could on the way back.
Once when my baby was a toddler we were at the local wading pool. I turned my head to speak to a friend and when I looked back at her she was floating face down and not moving. You have never seen me move so darned fast! I was amazed at myself. She was very cool, blue in the lips and shivering, unusual because it was a hot day and the water was lukewarm.
A few warm towels and care and she was back playing in about 15 minutes. You can bet I NEVER ever let either girl out of my sight near water after that.
I told her that story when she was about 13 and all she cared about was that she had been naked in front of people! LOL
2007-04-29 08:35:46 · answer #2 · answered by Noor al Haqiqa 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I know. This has been going on for a very long time. There are several reasons. The Atheists have their agenda to try to push Christianity out of everything and are trying to wear down the saints in the last days (Daniel 7:25). One other reason? People are in here only to play games---even some half-hearted Christians are doing this---and they are asking questions for the point of cheating. They get extra IDs and ask on one ID and answer on the other. I never did this and don't intend to. It is very dishonest and keeps the sincere people from getting any credit. Okay, another reason is that people are bored and just sort of going along with the chaos for fun you know and they are confused and lack purpose in their lives. So, I think that pretty much sums it up. (I have answered so many questions very well and yet only have 4% best answers. I rechecked one and saw that the answer chosen was absolutely stupid---they just happened to agree or maybe it was the ID cheating.)
2016-05-21 04:10:50 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why should an act of kindness be based on a religious affliation? Especially since the child can't control what religion his/her parents believe or don't believe. Such a choice should based on which child had the most reasonable chance of being rescued and on the rescuer's own abilities to rescue someone from drowning.
2007-04-28 17:50:09 · answer #4 · answered by Cacaoatl 3 · 4⤊ 1⤋
The closest one to me. I disagree that an atheist child would value life....If I was drowning I would use every ounce of strength to try to live. No one wants to die. And especially if we're talking about children.....
There's just one slight problem......I cant swim :P
hey I meant an atheist child wouldn't value life more (in response to the first answer). I'm sorry if it sounded different. I mean all would value life! :(
2007-04-28 18:00:09 · answer #5 · answered by E.T.01 5 · 4⤊ 2⤋
I do not think I would have time to ask what religion they were before I saved them! I would try to save all if I could! I presume there would be no time to interview everyone to see if they were the "right" religion! Nor would I care. I would want to get all of them if I could!
2007-04-28 17:50:20 · answer #6 · answered by Marie 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
The one that I knew I could. I really don't see a child with as a particular religion considering they are just doing what their parents tell them too.
2007-04-28 18:04:17 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I would save the closest child. Unless one of the children was mine, and then they would become a priority.
2007-04-28 17:47:27 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Tthat is subjective...well it depend on who need saving 1st...the one that my hand can grab upon. I need to save a child not a religion.
When matter of emergency like this, no colour race or religion would matter.
2007-04-28 20:53:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Since I would not waste the time conducting a poll to see who was what religion then I could save them ALL....lol
2007-04-28 17:48:42 · answer #10 · answered by Erinyes 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋