- Joined
- Jul 14, 2008
- Messages
- 91,278
- Points
- 113
Which of these 2 cases is more despicable and morally reprehensible in your view?
Your answer can be either, or both are equally despicable, or neither is despicable.
1. The perpetuator kidnaps a child and demands ransom from the parents. After repeated demands, the kidnapper fails to get the money and kills the child.
2. The perpetuator lends money to a child's parents. After repeated demands for repayment, the perpetuators fails to get back the money from the parents and kills their child.
My answer is most definitely case 1.
In case 2, the perpetuator is despicable and morally reprehensible.
He should be punished to the full extent of the law, as much as in case 1, which is the death penalty.
But there is one question for the child's parents in case 2.
If they loved their child so much, did they ever consider that their child would be harmed if they borrowed money from someone and refused to return it? The killer is no less guilty, but the parent has also contributed to the tragedy.
Your answer can be either, or both are equally despicable, or neither is despicable.
1. The perpetuator kidnaps a child and demands ransom from the parents. After repeated demands, the kidnapper fails to get the money and kills the child.
2. The perpetuator lends money to a child's parents. After repeated demands for repayment, the perpetuators fails to get back the money from the parents and kills their child.
My answer is most definitely case 1.
In case 2, the perpetuator is despicable and morally reprehensible.
He should be punished to the full extent of the law, as much as in case 1, which is the death penalty.
But there is one question for the child's parents in case 2.
If they loved their child so much, did they ever consider that their child would be harmed if they borrowed money from someone and refused to return it? The killer is no less guilty, but the parent has also contributed to the tragedy.