Ambrose2007 Forum Posts (8,881)

RE: If a situation demands that you or one of you children dies, which would you save

RE: If a situation demands that you or one of you children dies, which would you save

I think what's "dumb" about this thread is that if offers no possibility of an interesting answer. It's entirely rhetorical - much like asking: Does anyone here like to molest children?" If anyone did, or if anyone was willing to choose oneself over one's children in a life-death scenario, they'd never honestly admit it.

However, the question is far more complex than the OP or respondents appear aware of. For example, if you asked: "Should you sacrifice your life to your children?" the answer, I believe, would be a resounding no. That would be both unhealthy for the parents and the child(ren). It would be unreasonable to expect any of us to give up our lives under normal circumstances to our children, I'm sure most if not all here would agree. So how does that bear on the supposed self-evidence of the correct answer to the OP's question?

The answers also ignores the likelihood that by sacrificing oneself to a particular child, one might be also sacrificing a high value to other children. For example, say you were responsible for several children; your brave self-sacrifice might punish them more than if you lived (in the past, that might've caused the remaining children to be forced into the streets; today, perhaps foster homes). Also, what about your value to other people - for example, your soulmate? How would she or he feel about losing you?

Also, what if you weren't sure, or if the probability was fairly low, of success? In a life or death situation, the odds rarely are the clear. You might have a 5% chance, for instance, of saving your child while facing a 99% chance of death. While you're pondering that, you're also thinking about orphaning your other children and widowing your wife (as well as the loss to other family members and friends who love you).

Unfortunately, the OP's wording doesn't encourage substantive discussion of this nature. Not that most people would be interested in discussing it in any case. I'm not one to shy away from difficult questions myself. They can tell you a lot about who you are and the nature of one's cultural values.

RE: If a situation demands that you or one of you children dies, which would you save

I know, Conrad. It's ridiculous!

But what if you were on a desert island with no food available? Would you eat your mother-in-law?

RE: If a situation demands that you or one of you children dies, which would you save

It's interesting to consider that if he'd simply rephrased his question in a much less emotionally charged way - e.g., "Do you value your children more than yourself?", or "Would you sacrifice yourself to save your children?" - no one would've responded negatively, I think.

Why is that, do you think (CSers who replied in horror to the question)?

RE: Amity's Birthday today.

Have a great birthday, Amity. I enjoy your presence here!

Humbe Like Jesus?

This should be interesting. I wonder if the dude or anyone has done a video parody of the notion that Jesus = Love.

RE: Matured????

Maybe they just mean you look intelligent and/or wise? Or maybe they mean you appear to be older than 21? You may be dealing with people whose English-writing skills leave something to be desired.

RE: Liechtenstein and the tax evasion data theft

That's quite true, Conrad, and I thought of making that point myself. Some countries - presumably Liechtenstein - might not consider it to be a crime at all. Still, one could argue that Liechtenstein's policies are immoral, I suppose (I would argue the opposite, of course).

RE: Here we go again- Why do some races still feel that they are better than some other races

This is admittedly a very personal matter, but I feel that the one hundred meter race is superior to the marathon because it's more dramatic and doesn't put me to sleep.

Seriously, you're speaking of people of who have massive inferiority complexes and a LOT of inner rage at life or whomever.

RE: Your ex

Well, you have something to learn from me on this subject, Laura, since your claim is flat-out wrong.

RE: any cross dressers out there

Yet another religious thread!

RE: Was I all right?

Ah, two baldies just hanging out on a Saturday, eh, T?

RE: Was I all right?

The idea of improving/growing is one that many people - especially CSers, I think at times! - would do well to embrace, Life-Dream. I've noticed a lot of people here seem to view themselves as finished products, and as such, the idea of having or revealing weaknesses is not something they're comfortable with.

RE: Was I all right?

Good one, L. I can understand why you couldn't resist it.

RE: Was I all right?

Well-said, D!

By the way, I'm rooting for you in your upcoming rendezvous with paradise.

RE: Honesty On Line

Wow. That was awfully thoughtful of you!

RE: Was I all right?

Exactly (again). Communication is essential for a good relationship, and getting angry at someone, even for expressing his or her insecurities, is a great way to destroy that.

RE: Was I all right?

It's hard to imagine anything more insecure than worrying about revealing one's insecurities to our Significant Other.

RE: Honesty On Line

I think one way to weed out the game-players might be through requiring a well-developed friendship before taking it to the next level. My sense from my readings here and elsewhere is that deceivers/game-players want to "cut to the chase," so to speak - meaning that they want to jump immediately into a romantic connection where they can better exercise their manipulative goals. If that's true, then they would find attempts to slowly build a friendship annoying, preferring to rush quickly toward their relationship-control goals (of course, many people rush into a relationship for less devious reasons!).

So a red flag would be pressure to skip through (or past) the friendship-development phase into a torrid romance, and a possible (partial) antidote would be a refusal to accommodate that pace. I'm guessing many or most game-players would lose patience and move on to their next victim.

RE: Girls, do you check guys' buts?

If I were a lady, I would not only check out their "buts," but also their "howevers," "stills," and even there "moreovers." A lot of useful information can be had by checking how people use these qualifiers...

RE: Honesty On Line

I'm not sure that was sneaky enough, Scented. GG is a great believer in being informed about me in all my various and wondrous aspects.

I wonder if Barbara will reveal a bit more of minutiae of her bad experiences with respect to how much she "grilled" these guy(s)...

RE: Honesty On Line

Ha, Sweetly, Texas Barbara is asking the same questions on another thread.

The basic strategy, I think, is to get *highly* personal from the start. You want to know everything about your prospective mate. The more you know, the greater the probability that you'll catch him or her in a lie or inconsistency.

Some people aren't comfortable getting personal immediately. I'm sure it's fine to proceed at your own pace, but I would suggest not investing much emotionally until you have acquired considerable knowledge of your potential lover.

RE: Are they single or married ?

I agree with you, T. I'm just the exception, as they say, which, uh, proves the rule.

RE: Are they single or married ?

Very well-balanced analysis, I thought, Shell.

RE: Are they single or married ?

Well, G, I'd have to admit that dating you would be like winning lottery, because you get a fabulous two-for-one deal!

RE: Are they single or married ?

Maybe this analogy might help clarify what I mean: Say, you bought a hundred-dollar lottery ticket and won the lottery. You beat the odds, but that wouldn't mean that it would be a wise investment of most people's $100.

Similarly, the odds, in my opinion, are pretty long on coming out well in a relationship with someone who's separated. You might win, as we did, but you wouldn't feel right in recommending that others try it.

I would advise people to go into a "separated" relationship with both eyes firmly open. Perhaps you'll be the exception that will work.

I wouldn't do it again, unless I had very strong reasons to believe we'd be that exception, because I doubt the odds are good that I'd win the lottery twice.

RE: Are they single or married ?

Read my post again, with careful attention to the part "I wouldn't suggest this is an absolute rule."

RE: Are they single or married ?

I would add that our being merely separated caused us LOADS of grief, which I wouldn't recommend to anyone. We got through it, but I believe very few people would (when there are still unresolved attachments to one's ex).

Yes, some separatees (for lack of a better term) are quite sincere, and may be quite correct in saying that their former relationship is defunct. However, even if you sincerely believe that, you may be wrong. I was. And I think GG was as well (in a sense). Separating from someone you've loved and spent considerable time with can be a difficult and even treacherous process - not a process to be taken lightly. And many, if not most, long-term "separatees" - in the US, anyhow - are not separated for reasons having to do with not completing that process.

If you happen to be with one of them, I would suggest holding to your hat - perhaps even your nether regions - because you are in for one helluva a rough ride!

RE: Are they single or married ?

It's funny. When GG and I met, we were both "separated." Now we both agree that we wouldn't get involved with someone who was merely separated. I wouldn't suggest this is an absolute rule - in fact, obviously, GG and I broke it, and I'm glad we did - but the probability of a successful relationship, which is difficult enough sans such complications, is lowered sufficiently that is isn't, in both of our opinions, a good bet.

Of course, I'm not including people who live in countries which require barbaric wait-times for a divorce.

RE: Priorities...

I was thinking to myself the other day: "Self, where has Morgie been, and how is she doing?"

Good to see you popping up here again, my friend!