The Bridge
Forget that its a religious commercial in the end..just ask yourself..what would you do?
People who liked this video also liked
Comments
21 comments posted so far. Login to add a comment.
24
2. millybert69 commented 11 years ago
this video just made me go check apon my children cheers snotr such aad clip
54
5. loadrunner commented 11 years ago
The choice is hard, let the one you whole life is about die, to save 40 unknown people who not even know they were saved... Or save the one you love, and let 40 strangers die, you do not even know the initials.
28
6. senseishin commented 11 years ago
I never understood the "suffering" of God "sacrificing" his son. As an omnipotent and all-powerful being who knows all that is to come, God knows God's son will be resurrected (passive voice). Or God can simply resurrect God's son (active voice). Can one suffer or sacrifice anything if one can just get it back? Seeing as no one is omnipotent and all-powerful or knows how it feels to be either or both, no one can "authoritatively" say anything about God.
Sorry... I'll do as the title suggests and forget the fact it's a religious advertisement... I would save the people in the train. I'm a utilitarian: I can't help but say greatest common good.
Sorry... I'll do as the title suggests and forget the fact it's a religious advertisement... I would save the people in the train. I'm a utilitarian: I can't help but say greatest common good.
49
8. N3R3Z commented 11 years ago
If someone's interested, here's full version of this short movie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPwPjdftr-E
37
15. mikeab commented 11 years ago
I think he should be charged with murdering his own son, as he had to do something that he knew would kill him.
If he'd done nothing and the people died, I think the most he could be charged with is manslaughter by neglect, as he didn't have to actually do anything.
Anyway, it kind of reminds me of this ethics problem:
http://healthland.time.com/2011/12/05/would-you-kill-one-person-to-save-five-new-research-on-a-classic-debate/
If he'd done nothing and the people died, I think the most he could be charged with is manslaughter by neglect, as he didn't have to actually do anything.
Anyway, it kind of reminds me of this ethics problem:
http://healthland.time.com/2011/12/05/would-you-kill-one-person-to-save-five-new-research-on-a-classic-debate/
54
16. loadrunner commented 11 years ago
I wont give a damn about the train, and save my kid. I am not a superhero.
23
17. Skillerns commented 11 years ago
#4 Would you really pick your son and be guilty of hundreds of peoples death that likely got children of their own? Could you live a happy life after that? I know you love your son but would it be wurth saving and letting family just like your own to die insted? and not only 1...Think about it, think about it hard..
17
19. Spolson commented 11 years ago
Moving but why to you have to be afraid to hear the commercial. What would happen to you? On the other hand look where we are going. Vampires, Haunted everything, Lying politicians, Hate, People who vow to kill you for being an Infidel, Heads chopped off, Professional wrestling? What is so scary about Christianity that you have to tell people to alter the message. Why show it if it is so offensive?
37
20. Akira commented 11 years ago
Its not tragic, its sick. Putting someone in a situation facing such a choice, no matter whether real or imagined, whether story or not it the work of a sick and troubled individual. Such as the creators of this video.
Not something I would share with a friend. It does the opposite of advertising their faith but to illustrate what is wrong about the believers.
Not something I would share with a friend. It does the opposite of advertising their faith but to illustrate what is wrong about the believers.
35
21. schlafanzyk commented 11 years ago
Would be a great commercial for Djihadists as well. These are the same kind of nutjobs who sacrifice their sons and daughters for any holy cause, which is often just some fantasy that some idiots made up hundreds of years ago. The people who don't give a shit today, most likely won't give a shit tomorrow and the junkies will most likely still be junkies later. That doesn't mean they don't deserve help, but it should set obvious priorities and there is something seriously wrong with you if you put strangers lives above the life of your own offspring. How could you even be happy for a second that someone else's life benefited from you actively killing your own son, who had no choice at all and was simply born to a father with a hero complex. How is this even up for discussion? I'm confused.
This would be a real dilemma the other way around: Lots of people under the bridge and his family on the train. Would you choose to kill innocent strangers to save your family, not by mere inaction, but by pulling a lever? That would be much more interesting, because I would bet many people would still choose their family, even if they had forever to think about it.
This would be a real dilemma the other way around: Lots of people under the bridge and his family on the train. Would you choose to kill innocent strangers to save your family, not by mere inaction, but by pulling a lever? That would be much more interesting, because I would bet many people would still choose their family, even if they had forever to think about it.
-10 1. Dae commented 11 years ago