Skip to content | Skip to navigation
Found this on the internet, thought it would be interesting.
Question 1: If you knew a woman who was pregnant, who had 8 kids already, three who were deaf, two who were blind, one mentally retarded, and she had syphilis; would you recommend that she have an abortion?
Read the next question before scrolling down to the answer of this one.
Question 2: It is time to elect a new world leader, and your vote counts. Here are the facts about the three leading candidates:
Candidate A: Associates with crooked politicians, and consults with astrologists. He's had two mistresses. He also chain smokes and drinks 8 to 10 martinis a day.
Candidate B: He was kicked out of office twice, sleeps until noon, used opium in college and drinks a quart of whisky every evening.
Candidate C: He is a decorated war hero. He's a vegetarian, doesn't smoke, drinks an occasional beer and hasn't had any extramarital affairs.
Which of these candidates would be your choice?
Decide first, no peeking, then scroll down for the answer.
Candidate A is Franklin D. Roosevelt
Candidate B is Winston Churchill
Candidate C is Adolph Hitler
And by the way: Answer to the abortion question - if you said yes, you just killed Beethoven.
Pretty interesting ain't it?
Love is blind, but marriage is a real eye opener.
yep and rare miracles in all cases.
I agree with that statement. I think that none of these cases are actually representative of normality (outliers, all).
The abortion one has an obvious answer (and did you know that Beethoven was also deaf later in life--while he wrote his fifth symphony?). You just don't abort unless absolutely necessary.
As for the other cases that were brought up, well, I have a few things to say about them.
Yes, we have had some colorful characters in history that have done a lot of good for a lot of people. Yes, insane and power hungry people can be pretty "straight" in other ways.
But, this begs the question of public vs. private morality altogether, and it severely limits its scope and definition.
Sometimes people with bad personal habits are in a position to do a lot of public good, and they deliver. Sometimes. Rarely. When a person who is not privately moral takes a public position and ends up doing good in it, I applaud that person for being responsible and dedicated to something larger than himself. But, imagine how much more he could do if he had actual integrity--his personal and internal life matching that of his external life!
I do not deny that there are notable exceptions. There always are. It is not useful, however, to focus on exceptions. We would be better served to think about the general and widely applicable rule first, and then note that exceptions exist.
For the most part, when government officials have been privately immoral, they have done absolutely no good for us. In fact, they have done damage. That's the rule. The exceptions are few and far between. Selfishness, after all, is something that permeates all parts of a man's (speaking in the gender-neutral sense, here) life. Just think about politicians in the pockets of Hollywood. If they had private integrity, it would be impossible to keep them in anyone's public pocket.
Sig Wanted -- Apply Within