Moral Conundrums

[littlebabyclit]

#2 Developers want to buy your home and demolish it in order to build a research center in which animal experiments will be conducted. They offer you double the market value, would you sell?

No, I would not sell. I am against animal testing completely.

And nice post, janeyl.

 

[chargergirl]

#1 If you were put in a position to kill one person in order to save the lives of one hundred other people, could you kill?

If any member of my immediate family (husband, kids, parents) were among those 100, in a heartbeat.

#2 Developers want to buy your home and demolish it in order to build a research center in which animal experiments will be conducted. They offer you double the market value, would you sell?

Nope, never. I love where I live and my home has been in my family for 5 generations.

Good thread, Clowns.

 

[NawtyShutterBug]

#2 Developers want to buy your home and demolish it in order to build a research center in which animal experiments will be conducted. They offer you double the market value, would you sell?

At first, my immediate response to this question was hell no! but, upon further consideration... What would my saying no achieve? The developers would just find someone else to sell and the research centre would go ahead anyway so, my revised response would be yes! (why not? I don't own the house and it would really piss off my landlord!!! ) then, I would look into taking a more effective approach to preventing the centre from using animals for their experiments...

If it was for experiments for cosmetic purposes to sell a new anti aging face cream to stupid women who believe it will stop the aging process absolutely not under any circumstances. There's enough shampoo in the world now to make dripping it into the eyes of rabbits unnecessary

If it was for some of the hideous and unnecessary behavioural experiments that serve no purpose other than to satisfy human curiousity absolutely not

If it was for true medical progression I would have to think very carefully but seeing as most of them have no purpose and make very few actual proven advances in treating human disease-probably not

Money can't buy everything and the way we treat sentient beings as a commodity to be exploited sickens me

However-if you were to ask me if I would prefer some of this research to be carried out here in the UK where the industry is very highly regulated and conducted to an extent with a degree of integrity rather than being exported to a country where those things are not taken into consideration then of course i would. i'm not sure my conscience would allow me to assist the process though

and no, i'm not an animal rights activist and I do eat meat and wear leather. I'm a nurse and i see what some of the medical advances have been over recent years but having read some of the research, i'm not convinced that animal experiments have contributed as much as people assume they have

very good point, janeyl. one a lot of people forget to consider...

 

[IhateClowns]

If it was for experiments for cosmetic purposes to sell a new anti aging face cream to stupid women who believe it will stop the aging process absolutely not under any circumstances. There's enough shampoo in the world now to make dripping it into the eyes of rabbits unnecessary

If it was for some of the hideous and unnecessary behavioural experiments that serve no purpose other than to satisfy human curiousity absolutely not

If it was for true medical progression I would have to think very carefully but seeing as most of them have no purpose and make very few actual proven advances in treating human disease-probably not

Money can't buy everything and the way we treat sentient beings as a commodity to be exploited sickens me

However-if you were to ask me if I would prefer some of this research to be carried out here in the UK where the industry is very highly regulated and conducted to an extent with a degree of integrity rather than being exported to a country where those things are not taken into consideration then of course i would. i'm not sure my conscience would allow me to assist the process though

and no, i'm not an animal rights activist and I do eat meat and wear leather. I'm a nurse and i see what some of the medical advances have been over recent years but having read some of the research, i'm not convinced that animal experiments have contributed as much as people assume they have

Whether I agree or not, very good response, thanks for taking the time to answer the question

 

[Cinner]

It is interesting that all of the replies I read from females would kill the one to save the many. Some included friends, and children in the many. Many of the male responders spoke at length about circumstances and experience, or lack of it, in hostile situations. Maybe the female really is the deadliest of the species.

Did my post suggest that?

 

[IhateClowns]

#3 You have the repsponsibility to fill a position within your company. A friend has applied for the position and is qualified for the job. Another applicant has applied and is a lot more qualified with many more years of experience doing the job you need filled. Both go through the processes and in the end you have to make the tough decision. Do you go with your friend who is much less qualified or the applicant that is more qualified and requires a lot less training to get started?

 

[LustfulOne50]

#3 You have the repsponsibility to fill a position within your company. A friend has applied for the position and is qualified for the job. Another applicant has applied and is a lot more qualified with many more years of experience doing the job you need filled. Both go through the processes and in the end you have to make the tough decision. Do you go with your friend who is much less qualified or the applicant that is more qualified and requires a lot less training to get started?

This being a values question...for the good of a friend or what is best for the company's stability...with no background on either person...so how I make a reasonable choice...what if the quick start was fired from another job for sexual harassment...or with my personal bias it the other applicant is female and is better qualified and I don't her....not a good solid question...No Answer

 

[NattyBumppo]

#3 You have the repsponsibility to fill a position within your company. A friend has applied for the position and is qualified for the job. Another applicant has applied and is a lot more qualified with many more years of experience doing the job you need filled. Both go through the processes and in the end you have to make the tough decision. Do you go with your friend who is much less qualified or the applicant that is more qualified and requires a lot less training to get started?

The more qualified person. If the person I hire can't do the job or costs the company more money to get the job done, my ass could be gone. My friend, being my friend, will understand anyway.

 

[DrunknBarbarian]

..........

 

[Roxanne_Smith69]

#3 You have the repsponsibility to fill a position within your company. A friend has applied for the position and is qualified for the job. Another applicant has applied and is a lot more qualified with many more years of experience doing the job you need filled. Both go through the processes and in the end you have to make the tough decision. Do you go with your friend who is much less qualified or the applicant that is more qualified and requires a lot less training to get started?

The more qualified applicant. Friendship is friendship, business is business. And a true friend would know and understand this.

Besides -- hiring friends is a VERY big mistake. Difficult to separate supervisor/employee from friendship and could potentially make for problems down the road both in the workplace and in the friendship. Conflict of interest claims may arise, partiality claims from other employees, all sorts of problems.

Rox

 

[IhateClowns]

This being a values question...for the good of a friend or what is best for the company's stability...with no background on either person...so how I make a reasonable choice...what if the quick start was fired from another job for sexual harassment...or with my personal bias it the other applicant is female and is better qualified and I don't her....not a good solid question...No Answer

Wow I have no idea what you just said.

 

[kendra1980]

#3 You have the repsponsibility to fill a position within your company. A friend has applied for the position and is qualified for the job. Another applicant has applied and is a lot more qualified with many more years of experience doing the job you need filled. Both go through the processes and in the end you have to make the tough decision. Do you go with your friend who is much less qualified or the applicant that is more qualified and requires a lot less training to get started?

I have been in this position a couple of times.

in both instances, I hired the person who was most qualified.

I love my friends, and they are well aware of that, but in my position, it was MY JOB to hire the person best suited for the positions at hand.

In both instances, everything worked out just fine.

 

[littlebabyclit]

#3 You have the repsponsibility to fill a position within your company. A friend has applied for the position and is qualified for the job. Another applicant has applied and is a lot more qualified with many more years of experience doing the job you need filled. Both go through the processes and in the end you have to make the tough decision. Do you go with your friend who is much less qualified or the applicant that is more qualified and requires a lot less training to get started?

My answer varies, depending how close I am to the friend I might hire. I might let a close friend apply for the job, but most likely wouldn't hire that friend anyways. The conundrum question implies I have the position and power to hire someone, therefore I might be a boss or a department head? I would not want to be a boss over a close friend nor would I ever want to have to fire or get a close friend fired down the road if things don't work out.

If the friendship is less important to me and more expendable, then I might be more likely to hire a friend, with the clearly understood caveat that if said friend needs to be removed from the position due to performance related issues, then he/she understands well ahead of time that possibility could be chosen out of professional and business needs.

 

[newbiebabe]

#3 You have the repsponsibility to fill a position within your company. A friend has applied for the position and is qualified for the job. Another applicant has applied and is a lot more qualified with many more years of experience doing the job you need filled. Both go through the processes and in the end you have to make the tough decision. Do you go with your friend who is much less qualified or the applicant that is more qualified and requires a lot less training to get started?

I go with the one who needs less training and is more qualified.. bar none. I have been in this position and yes it is hard. However, I am a hardnose when it comes to making sure that I fill the positions with the best qualified applicant, not only for the company's sake but also for mine as I am usually the trainer also.

 

[MsTexas]

The more qualified applicant ...

Friendship is friendship

Business is business

If you can't seperate the two, trouble will soon follow.

 

[Rikki_13]

More qualified person gets the job. Friends sometimes abuse what you have helped them to get and think that you will be more lenient on them because you are their friend. Nobody needs that kind of hassle.

 

[IhateClowns]

Ok so maybe not a moral conundrum, but an interesting question none the less

#4 You discover you will die in exactly five years time but if you win a coin toss you can live for another thirty years. If you lose you will die in one months time. Would you take the gamble?

 

[NattyBumppo]

Ok so maybe not a moral conundrum, but an interesting question none the less

#4 You discover you will die in exactly five years time but if you win a coin toss you can live for another thirty years. If you lose you will die in one months time. Would you take the gamble?

I want to see the coin first.

 

[IhateClowns]

I want to see the coin first.

A shiny buffalo nickel

 

[DrunknBarbarian]

.........

 

[Cinner]

#3 You have the repsponsibility to fill a position within your company. A friend has applied for the position and is qualified for the job. Another applicant has applied and is a lot more qualified with many more years of experience doing the job you need filled. Both go through the processes and in the end you have to make the tough decision. Do you go with your friend who is much less qualified or the applicant that is more qualified and requires a lot less training to get started?

Hire the more qualified applicant. You are in a position of trust and you do your self a disservice to betray that.

 

[Cinner]

Ok so maybe not a moral conundrum, but an interesting question none the less

#4 You discover you will die in exactly five years time but if you win a coin toss you can live for another thirty years. If you lose you will die in one months time. Would you take the gamble?

I would take the gamble. It seems that I have enough of a certainty knowing when my last day will be. I would be able to make plans and live fully in whatever time I have left. Of course I'm assuming that the quality of my life will mean that I will WANT to leve for the 30 years should the coin come up as I called it.

 

[Rikki_13]

Ok so maybe not a moral conundrum, but an interesting question none the less

#4 You discover you will die in exactly five years time but if you win a coin toss you can live for another thirty years. If you lose you will die in one months time. Would you take the gamble?

I wouldnt take the gamble. I would live those five yrs to the fullest and try to fulfill as many things on my bucket list as possible. Let those that I love, know exactly how special and awesome they are to me. I want to be remembered as someone who loved life and the blessings I had in my life.

 

[newbiebabe]

I would take the five and live my best life. I would spend it making sure daily that those I love know it and doing those things I had desired to do but never gotten around to.

The first I do even now...heard somebody say once that they never let their kids leave the house without telling them they loved them just in case it was the last time they saw each other. Sounds morbid maybe but the point is to take the time to let those you care about know that you care. I adopted this in my own life and it has been wonderful. The second...still working on...not so easy at times....

 

[LustfulOne50]

I personally took that gamble two years ago with a 10% chance of getting off the operating table. Alternative was death at any moment and that was real as well. It came to me death has no schedule it can came at anytime let me take that % no matter how small ,,for I will be where I'm suppose to be at the end of the operation. Well, 8 hours, a full blood replacement, put to sleep in ICU for four days and another 28 days in hospital....I am here with more time on the schedule then I had 2 two years ago.