A question of Morality

[truethat]

I'm just interested in how our members would answer this scenario:

A woman whose husband is away on a business trip goes to visit her lover. On her way there she has to pass a rather large bridge. She arrives, they do their thing, she leaves. On her way back, crossing the bridge, she sees a madman who is holding a gun. She runs back to her lover's house, but he rejects her and has another woman with him. She calls her best friend, who is busy at work and cannot come to get her. She calls her mother, who is also busy and tells her she cannot come. The woman then crosses the bridge in a rush to get home before her husband arrives and alas, the madman kills her.

Now.....I want you to tell me who is the most to blame for what happened to this woman, on a sliding scale. That is, rank the woman, her husband, her lover, her best friend, her mother, and the madman. Who is the most responsible to who is the least. In my mind, it is the following - again, from the most responsible to the least:

For example:

1. The madman

2. The woman

3. The best friend

4. The mother

5. The lover

6. The husband

I am interested in how people rank them, and interestingly enough I think its unbelievable how things vary. I am really interested to see how you rank, and to see WHY you rank them the way you do.

[MissMelsWell]

Actually, I'd take the story right out of this. For all we know, she could have been shopping at Macys on the other side of the bridge.

the madman first, followed closely by the woman. Everyone else in my opinion has no responsibility what-so-ever.

I guess I came to that conclusion because someone in my life had to face a moral dilema like this. After thinking about that incident for the last 3 years, I had to come to the conclusion that only the two involved were responsible and were to blame. It was a hard and difficult process to come to that realization.

[Purplos]

This is how I would rank them:

1. The madman

2. The woman (because she should have avoided the bridge or phoned the police)

The rest of the people have no responsibility whatsoever in this case.

You could make an argument that the city's police force is partially responsible for not keeping madmen off bridges.

Actually, I had to edit it to say this. The question arises about if the 'madman' was just a heartless criminal or actually mentally ill. If he was certifiably mentally ill with no true control over his behavior or thought patterns, he is not to blame either.

Edited March 13, 2007 by Purplos

[EmpressStarXVII]

1. The madman

2. The mother

3. The lover

4. The best friend

5. The woman

6. The husband

------

Madman is first, because no matter what "bad" things she was doing, he still had the gun in his hand. The mother is next because a mother should never deny her childs plea of help. Then the lover, who should have at least let her sit in a back room or something until she felt it was safe to leave. The best friend, who wasn't much of a friend. The woman because if she hadn't been cheating in the first place it wouldn't have happened, and the husband is last, who has no blame.

[eqgumby]

Wow. Someone need fuel for a term paper?

The woman: never should have been there.

The Mother: She's her MOTHER!

The friend: Too busy? Not nice.

The lover: Should not deny sanctuary to anyone.

The Madman: Assuming he is mad, as in crazy, unable to tell wrong from right.

The Husband: Little if any responsibility, assuming he is an average partner and not some horrid heel I guess.

[ConservativePessimist]

1. The madman

2. The woman

3. The best friend

4. The mother

5. The lover

6. The husband

1. The woman - if she had not been cheating, she wouldn't have been there in the first place

2. The best friend, mother, and lover - all guilty of the same thing, denying sanctuary to someone who needs it. Especially if she told them that the guy on the bridge has a gun... I mean... wow "naw, I'm too busy working to make sure you don't get shot, good luck."

3. The madman - crazy, so... I'm not really sure...

4. The husband - it's never the other spouse's fault if their partner cheats on them

[Grandpa Greenman]

The madman, he is the one with the gun.

The lover, he should have let her in no matter what. (They could have had a nice three some.)

The best friend should have call the police to help her friend.

The mother should have also called the police to help her child.

The woman was dumb, but she didn't kill herself. She should have called the police.

The husband he was out of town and clueless to what was going on.

[MissMelsWell]

See, I find moral dilema's like this difficult (this is probably why I always get excused from jury duty )

I have a dear friend who was abused, sodomized, blackmailed and terrorized by a person in a power postion. The abuse started when the friend was young (but not too young) and continued right into adulthood. Eventually the abused person had a mental break (as far as anyone can tell they did end up in a state mental hospital for a year after the incident) and killed the abuser in what could be determined as a premeditated act. My friend was sentenced to 20 years in prison and was eventually released after serving 10 due to a technicallity and a new trial being granted.

Did my friend deserve a sentence of 1st degree murder? Should they have spent 10 years in prison for killing a paedofile, one who was PROVEN to have abused other children as well?

Interesting enough. My friend believes that a prison sentence was something that had to happen. They did the wrong thing and took another life, even if that person was a monster. Even though my friend was likely not in their right mind when the incident happened, there was no real question that they knew on some level what they were doing was definitely wrong.

So who's to blame? Only the person who perpetrated and the victim. I know that's TOTALLY not what anyone wants to hear. Trust me, I'm all for victim's rights, but I don't think victims are always completely blameless (I'll make an exception, very young children are blameless, by the time you reach teen years, you have to take some responsibility for your actions). That's a VERY painful thing to work out. **ducking** I know I'm going to get flamed on this one. *sigh*

Oh and ya, before anyone comes up with a million scenarios... I too have been a victim of violent crime some 20 years ago. I wasn't completely blameless either. I made a poor choice that resulted in my getting my face smashed up by a mugger.

Edited March 13, 2007 by MissMelsWell

[Mainpoint]

I'm just interested in how our members would answer this scenario:

A woman whose husband is away on a business trip goes to visit her lover. On her way there she has to pass a rather large bridge. She arrives, they do their thing, she leaves. On her way back, crossing the bridge, she sees a madman who is holding a gun. She runs back to her lover's house, but he rejects her and has another woman with him. She calls her best friend, who is busy at work and cannot come to get her. She calls her mother, who is also busy and tells her she cannot come. The woman then crosses the bridge in a rush to get home before her husband arrives and alas, the madman kills her.

Now.....I want you to tell me who is the most to blame for what happened to this woman, on a sliding scale. That is, rank the woman, her husband, her lover, her best friend, her mother, and the madman. Who is the most responsible to who is the least. In my mind, it is the following - again, from the most responsible to the least:

For example:

1. The madman

2. The woman

3. The best friend

4. The mother

5. The lover

6. The husband

I am interested in how people rank them, and interestingly enough I think its unbelievable how things vary. I am really interested to see how you rank, and to see WHY you rank them the way you do.

I disagree with most of ya all in 1 important aspect

here is my list

1. The woman

2. The lover

3. The mother

4. The best friend

5. The husband

6. The madman

The madman is well MAD. If you had the person who gave the gun to the madman i would rank that person the highest!

[BlueMoods]

I'm just interested in how our members would answer this scenario:

A woman whose husband is away on a business trip goes to visit her lover. On her way there she has to pass a rather large bridge. She arrives, they do their thing, she leaves. On her way back, crossing the bridge, she sees a madman who is holding a gun. She runs back to her lover's house, but he rejects her and has another woman with him. She calls her best friend, who is busy at work and cannot come to get her. She calls her mother, who is also busy and tells her she cannot come. The woman then crosses the bridge in a rush to get home before her husband arrives and alas, the madman kills her.

Now.....I want you to tell me who is the most to blame for what happened to this woman, on a sliding scale. That is, rank the woman, her husband, her lover, her best friend, her mother, and the madman. Who is the most responsible to who is the least. In my mind, it is the following - again, from the most responsible to the least:

For example:

1. The madman

2. The woman

3. The best friend

4. The mother

5. The lover

6. The husband

I am interested in how people rank them, and interestingly enough I think its unbelievable how things vary. I am really interested to see how you rank, and to see WHY you rank them the way you do.

1- The husband - he obviously isn't being what he should be for his wife.

2- The wife - she should have discussed the problem(s) with her husband before it got this far. Also should have called police.

3- The Lover - he should have turned the wife away before anything happened knowing she was married to somebody else. Could have called police as well.

4- The madman - he did commit the murder

5- the mother - she could have called the authorities

6- The friend - same - could have called police

[Mainpoint]

I disagree with most of ya all in 1 important aspect

here is my list

1. The woman

2. The lover

3. The mother

4. The best friend

5. The husband

6. The madman

The madman is well MAD. If you had the person who gave the gun to the madman i would rank that person the highest!

Ok for the rest of the ranking lover second because he would use her, then not help her in actuality decieving her and her crossing that long bridge in the first place.

Why mother over best friend. Blood is thicker than water!

Why husband over madman why by default ofcourse

[Mainpoint]

Ok for the rest of the ranking lover second because he would use her, then not help her in actuality decieving her and her crossing that long bridge in the first place.

Why mother over best friend. Blood is thicker than water!

Why husband over madman why by default ofcourse

Why woman at first place

She made all the ultimate decisions with knowing the risks that lead to her demise

[ConservativePessimist]

1- The husband - he obviously isn't being what he should be for his wife.

2- The wife - she should have discussed the problem(s) with her husband before it got this far. Also should have called police.

3- The Lover - he should have turned the wife away before anything happened knowing she was married to somebody else. Could have called police as well.

4- The madman - he did commit the murder

5- the mother - she could have called the authorities

6- The friend - same - could have called police

I couldn't possibly disagree more. Even if the husband isn't doing all that he should, that doesn't mean that the woman has the right to cheat on him! She should have gone to him first. We all make mistakes, and often times our spouses or significant others are mad at us. That warants discussion, not infidelity.

[IamsSon]

I think it's interesting that you would want to spread blame for the act of a madman. The only one responsible here is the one who committed the act, because if the madman had not been there, the event would not have happened despite the fact that the woman was committing adultery, that the lover was a selfish uncaring person or that others were too busy or away.

[MissMelsWell]

I think it's interesting that you would want to spread blame for the act of a madman. The only one responsible here is the one who committed the act, because if the madman had not been there, the event would not have happened despite the fact that the woman was committing adultery, that the lover was a selfish uncaring person or that others were too busy or away.

unfortunately in this scenario the woman is also to blame. She has to take responsibility not for the immoral act, but for the fact that she was someplace she shouldn't have been. And in being someplace she wasn't suppose to be, she made an effort to hide that fact by going back to face the madman to cover up that she was doing something wrong. You can wait in a diner or a park or go to the police rather than facing a madman you know is armed and dangrous. She's absolutely to blame as well.

Now if she was driving happily down the freeway at noon and is suppose to be there, and gets picked off by an unseen sniper randomly, well, that's a little different. In that case, she's a true victim and utterly blameless.

Edited March 13, 2007 by MissMelsWell

[ConservativePessimist]

Isn't it a question of who is to blame for her death?

Take, for example, if her friend had come and helped her, would she have died? No. So, does that friend share responsibility in her death? I'd say so.

[MissMelsWell]

There really aren't enough details in this story make a good judgement call but if you have to base a judgement on what is said in the story as truethat presented it, you can only blame the woman and the madman.

For example, had she called the friend, who knows (there aren't any details) the friend may have been killed by the madman. See what I mean?

[IamsSon]

unfortunately in this scenario the woman is also to blame. She has to take responsibility not for the immoral act, but for the fact that she was someplace she shouldn't have been. And in being someplace she wasn't suppose to be, she made an effort to hide that fact by going back to face the madman to cover up that she was doing something wrong. You can wait in a diner or a park or go to the police rather than facing a madman you know is armed and dangrous. She's absolutely to blame as well.

Now if she was driving happily down the freeway at noon and is suppose to be there, and gets picked off by an unseen sniper randomly, well, that's a little different. In that case, she's a true victim and utterly blameless.

Good point Miss, but does that then mean that a woman who dresses provocatively and goes to a bar is guilty of her own rape?

Additionally, that seems to argue against truly taking responsibility, the madman did not have to kill her, but he did, yes, he may have been mad, but he still made the decision to kill her. Assigning responsibility to anyone else takes away the guilt from the only one to have committed the crime of murder. are the others guilty of other crimes? Yes. Obviously, the wife and her lover are guilty of adultery, which is still a crime, but the others, at least based on what is revealed in the story are not guilty of a crime, and their responsibility for the event is at best marginal.

But I still posit that the only one to blame for her death is the one who killed her.

[Leonardo]

Interesting question in causality, true.

Here's my ranking

1. The woman

2. Her husband

3= Her mother

3= Her best friend

4. Her lover

5. the madman

This is assuming the madman is actually truly mad (i.e. mentally unstable)

[truethat]

Here's my ranking

1. The madman

That's it. All the rest are not responsible. The woman was a stupid tramp. But plenty of stupid tramps walk the street and are not killed. The lover was a jerk. Her family was uncaring and her friends as well.

I notice there is in our society a real resistance towards making people personally accountable for their own behavior.

Mad or not. Guilty.

[Mainpoint]

I think it's interesting that you would want to spread blame for the act of a madman. The only one responsible here is the one who committed the act, because if the madman had not been there, the event would not have happened despite the fact that the woman was committing adultery, that the lover was a selfish uncaring person or that others were too busy or away.

Why should the madman get the blame? I totally disagree

Go to a mental hospital

You will see people do all sorts of crazy things

Some mad people can not only hurt others but harm themselves

The question why is a person mad

Is a person mad by drinking too much alcohol as an example? If thats the case then the madman deserves to be on the top of the list

Because in this case the instigating factor was initiated by the madman himself.

But what if the madman has been mad since birth should the madman be blamed I dont think so. You can blame the caregiver who let the person loose but i wont agree with blaming the madman

Thats where the insanity plea comes in modern jurisprudence.

Now you have taken the madman out of the picture.

Whos actions have most contributed to this event

I have to say none other than the woman herself.

She knows she was doing something evil when she felt too afraid calling the husband. Its like a person who has run over somebody feeing afraid calling the police. She crossed that long desolate bridge. She made the decision to will have sex even she knew the amount of effort needed for secrecy and danger this act posed.

[truethat]

The insanity plea needs to be changed to "Guilty by reason of insanity" instead of "Not guilty by reason of insanity"

If a person is that screwed up then kill them because to say society has to understand when people go around murdering people because "they're crazy" I don't know what to say.

There was a woman here in NYC that was pushed on a subway track and decapitated by some lunatic who refused to take his meds and went off the deep end.

Sorry. Locking them up is not worth the time or effort. Either donate them to science or chuff them off.

Watch how fast the crazies start to sober up.

When you tell someone they aren't responsible for their own behavior its like handing them a free pass.

[MissMelsWell]

Good point Miss, but does that then mean that a woman who dresses provocatively and goes to a bar is guilty of her own rape?

Additionally, that seems to argue against truly taking responsibility, the madman did not have to kill her, but he did, yes, he may have been mad, but he still made the decision to kill her. Assigning responsibility to anyone else takes away the guilt from the only one to have committed the crime of murder. are the others guilty of other crimes? Yes. Obviously, the wife and her lover are guilty of adultery, which is still a crime, but the others, at least based on what is revealed in the story are not guilty of a crime, and their responsibility for the event is at best marginal.

But I still posit that the only one to blame for her death is the one who killed her.

I knew that was going to come up!

No, the madman bears the brunt of the responsibility (I said that earlier) and the woman bears her own responsibility.

As to hte first question of rape and provacative dress... I'm going to answer that in a way very few people will like. Yes and NO. Now DO NOT get me wrong. No woman deserves to be raped, that's horrible and anyone who perpertrates that kind of crime deserves to have the book thown at them and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law I don't care what the circumstances are or were. Now, as far as provacative dress goes... My feeling has always been why make yourself a bigger target to violent crime than you already are by just being a woman. The woman didn't cause the rape, but she did hang a conceptual sign around her neck that says "hey notice me!" I could acheive the same effect by wandering around in a sweatshirt and jeans looking completely oblivious. It's not a matter of dress per se, it's a matter of confidence and reducing your odds at being selected as a target for any kind of crime.

Like I said, when I was 21 I was mugged in a parking lot by a guy who quite literally broke my face. I take partial responsibility for that. I saw the guy in the parking lot, I even moved my car to a more well lit area of the lot when I spotted him. He still approached my car (with other people standing not more than 30 feet away) and I still failed because my door was unlocked, he opened it, hid from the other people behind the open door and cracked my face and then pulled me out of the car in a way that looked like I was hugging him. Not even onlookers realized I was being attacked. At that point I was able to get my knee into his groin and he dropped me and took off... even then onlookers didn't process what was going on until I started to crawl across the pavement.

The moral is that I never should have been driving with my doors unlocked at night, I should never had assumed the other onlookers would prevent an attack or come to my aid. I'd even go as far as to say I was dressed a little provacatively too.... tiny little blouse, and a miniskirt... but it didn't cause the attack ,it was my stupidity for not paying attention to my surroundings and inviting unwanted attention.

[bornagainuhmanduh]

Here's my ranking

1. The madman

That's it. All the rest are not responsible. The woman was a stupid tramp. But plenty of stupid tramps walk the street and are not killed. The lover was a jerk. Her family was uncaring and her friends as well.

I notice there is in our society a real resistance towards making people personally accountable for their own behavior.

Mad or not. Guilty.

I agree. I doesn't matter whether he was mad or not. He is the one who killed.

[truethat]

I know I have the same attitude about that. I was attacked when I was a teen ager and my mother threw me out of the house at 4 oclock in the morning. I was 14 years old and got p***ed off and went walking instead of staying home on the porch, because I was p***ed.

I realize now that I am probably lucky to be alive. Whose fault was that? Well we could do the same sort of morality test I guess but for me the only question I can ask is "what did I do wrong?"

I realized walking around cocksure doesn't protect you from nut jobs.

But the bottom line is personal responsibility. It starts with the mad man but it starts with the woman as well.

What I find interesting is that people are bringing in her adultery like she DESERVED it because she was committing adultery.

If she was just walking home would you consider her responsible?