I would think that intent should play a role for reasons already stated above.
What exactly are we talking about when we say "held morally responsible"? someone gets to yell at you?
Shoud individuals be held responsible for their INACTION?
by nicolaou 44 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
slimboyfat
In my opinion yes, sometimes it can be wrong not to act. If you see someone in trouble and choose not to help you are morally as well as sometimes legally culpable. Is there a further purpose to the question?
-
stan livedeath
straying off topic slightly...
my wife tells me that in her home country, if a driver hits a pedestrian--then they are liable for the poor victims medical bills--which obviously can be significant.
so--sometimes the driver takes an alternative action---reversing back over the victim--to finish them off--and avoid those medical bills.
-
scratchme1010
Forget the law for now, I'm going for the morality of the question.
Imagine a hypothetical situation where saving a life requires almost no effort from you and presents you with no personal risk.
If you fail to act should you be held morally responsible for any harm or fatalities?
I don't do "what if" scenarios. They are completely useless.
-
LisaRose
Imagine a hypothetical situation where saving a life requires almost no effort from you and presents you with no personal risk.
Things are seldom that black and white, but yes, you are morally obligated to save a life in that circumstance.
-
Fisherman
"Am I my brother's keeper?"
I would instinctively and most people would too; and who wouldn't? It is human nature to do so. But there are a lot of different circumstances and things can get complicated with laws governing everything. I don't think that laws should force people to be good Samaritans.
-
stuckinarut2
Good thread!
Yes, its an interesting question. Is failing to act, (if you have the power and ability to do so) acceptable?
Based on the scriptural message at ezekial 33:8,9 and ezekial 3:18, then failing to take action make someone guilty...
So, applying this to the Society, they have failed to act on many issues, including the correct way to handle child safety and child abuse issues! So, they are guilty according to their "God's" directions!
-
Simon
I think you have a moral responsibility, but that doesn't really mean a lot does it? It's just what others think of you ... so comes down to what you care of their judgement. If you didn't care about someone else's life then there's a good chance you don't mind a few negative thoughts and opinions.
Should it me legally mandated? There are so many ways this can be abused and I'd love to know what cases have ever been prosecuted (some of these laws sound like wishful thinking, I wonder if they have a practical effect).
It depends on the situation to some extent. If it's something I can do for a stranger with little risk to myself then I will do what I can to help, especially if it involves warning them against danger. If I see you on ice and you fall through then there is no way on earth that I'm going to risk myself to help you. I'll call the emergency services but IMO you contributed to your own predicament through your own poor choices.
-
nicolaou
I asked the question because of a story that has been on my mind for more than two years. Alexia Walenkaki was playing in a North London park when part of tree fell and killed her. The council had not performed checks on the tree for over a year and a half - that was their inaction and an inqest was opened.
Alexias mother said;
If it wasn’t for those lapses by the council, Alexia would still be here
She was denied legal aid and the full inqest which took a year and a half to even get started has, I believe, still not concluded.
Huge tragedies like the Boxing Day tsunami or Haitian earthquake lead many to question gods own inaction and there are tortuous justifications from some quarters. But it's these individual stories with a name and a face that hit me hard.
I'm not angry with god for his inaction, he isn't there, but I despair at the praise he gets when tragedies like this happen. The 'comfort' that grieving parents are offered from believers in a god who chose inaction.
Beautiful Alexia died the day before her sixth birthday.
-
Fisherman
The council had not performed checks on the tree for over a year and a half - that was their inaction and an inqest was opened.
That's different story. That could be negligence but there is no intention to cause harm involved; it was an accident. But let's say you saw someone in peril, for example, you saw someone drowning a couple of feet away from you, and with zero risk to yourself, you did not throw a rope or a lifesaver that was nearby or even attempt to help, you simply walked away. In this case, you could be morally responsible; but should you be held legally responsible is the issue that I was responding to in my previous post.