I know that the others have focused on the same question about the ethical dilemma presented by the Inuits or the South American tribe from the video, but I think there's just so many issues with it to be brought up, that it's okay that I'm focusing on that question, too.
That said, I wanted to focus more on the video we watched. I was obviously disturbed at the idea of killing an innocent child. Personally, I could not imagine taking part of that custom. At the same time, I found myself questioning the ethical justification of the evangelicals invading the tribe and interfering in their lifestyle. The fact that they saved that little girls life is really excellent, but you also have to ask yourself if that was their place. The tribe has its own traditions and customs that it has survived on for years and years, and while we may not agree or understand some of them, we cannot thrust our beliefs and opinions on them. I don't want them to kill their children either... I think that is a horrible thing, but I don't know if the evangelicals, especially with their religious intentions, have the right to interfere.
I'd like to hear what you think about that situation. I keep questioning my own opinion, because once I start writing that we shouldn't interfere with the killing of children, I feel like a horrible person. But do you understand where I'm coming from?
Oh, ethics!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I completely understand why answering this question is hard. Was it the evangelical Christians that were wrong or is it the natives that are wrong. I do not believe it was the evangelical Christians right to take the girl. they captured her. At the same time i dont believe it is correct for the Native Americans to kill an innocent child. Or any human being at all. This is kind of weird for me to say this, but i dont agree with any side! I am more on the Christian side because they are saving a life. They may have been intruding but at least they saved a human life. I know it sounds like im rambling, but this is how I feel. That no one is right in this argument. Although I would rather be on the side that saves a life than ends one.
But is it not part of the evangelical christian belief/culture to spread the word of their god?
Now that's a relative term, it might not mean doing it in the way that the evangelical's are doing in South America, but they are still following their culture.
Where do we find the balance between cultures like this?
First off they where a South American tribe, not Native Americans and a part of me sides with them more then the evangelicals. The tribe didn't know any better and didn't have better technology to help their young. Ok, sure the evangelicals saved that child's life but was it their place?
Now I'm not all hog wild on killing small children with deformities. But I'm not ok with people forcing their ideas and views on to people who can be influenced to easily by them.
Wow now my head hurts from all of this thinking..
I also don't feel that evangelicals belief/culture is to spread the "word", although they might think it is...or at least I really don't agree with that...
I'm not taking sides, I'm simply acting as a bystander of both cultures.
The Evangelicals, though having great motives, were wrong to try and press their religion on the culture of these people. The story we saw on Television I feel sided more with the Evangelicals, focusing on the children they saved and whatnot and that's great, but inversely you have the people who've lived their for generations uninhibited and survived.
I believe that we should let cultures such as these should be left alone, after all we wouldn't like it if they came into our neighborhoods trying to spread their culture onto us.
I agree by Vanessa saying the evangelists have no right invading their sanctum and imposing different ways and changes onto a tribe who lives by tradition. I would not want anybody doing the same.
Even so, the perspective of the Evangelists is that they have the divine right...or rather the divine command from God to "save" the souls of all individuals who "sin" and those who do not believe in "christ"
This is where it becomes arguable because they have no right trying to change a people but at the same time the Inuit Tribe, as humans don't need to kill their babies if there is a way to help the kids. If medicine existed in their culture, then there would be no point in killing the babies.
I am a bystander and merely observe both sides. Both sides have their points and flaws... but no body has the right to take life. The evanglists piss me off for some odd reason.
I'm glad to know that I am not the only one who is really unable to firmly take a stance on this ethical issue.
I don't think there is a right answer for this question. It all depends on the wording.
Should we intervene and stop the South American tribe from murdering innocent children who are born with deformities?
or
Is it right for a religious group to kidnap children from a South American tribe and then force their beliefs on the tribe's people that do not know better?
As everyone has said before, this is a hard question for me. Killing some is be avoided at all cost. I am also strongly against people forcing their beliefs on another person.
I side more with the South American tribe. I am not for killing the children, but that is what they know. I think for this all to be right, both sides have to approach this in a different way.
When I viewed the video, I also at first was tramuatized by the video and how we actuelly saw the whole tribe. Also that the kid that was younge and innocent and was brutally killed was unbelievable. When we were explained that they wanted to kill these young children because they were so called "evil" and they would not be welcomed into their tribe and they would bring "bad luck". Its not rite at all to do this to anyone or any child. That is their tribe and culture so i really cant go against it at all. This is all my opinoin and i agree with everyone else.
Post a Comment