What Would You Do/not Do For A Million Dollars?

[Kimmy]

And if that is what you got from reading this topic and ALL of Dan56's posts, then you, Elphaba, are missing the point entirely. I, being perhaps a lesser person than Dan56, would quite happily kill who ever I had to in order to protect my family but that is NOT what Dan56 suggested at all.

Yes, I believe the point I was making went over your head. If I sound like a sociopath, its only because you've taken everything out of context to make me sound that way? Get your mind out of the gutter, I mentioned none of those things you listed. What exactly does molestation, torture, or rape have to do with survival? Or money? Re-read my post to get a better grasp of the content. I gave specific examples of what I was referring to. I won't rehash it, but my simple point was that if you had the choice of stealing a loaf of bread or starving to death, most people would resort to theft to survive. I did say under 'certain circumstances', which did not include molesting children... How would that feed anyone anyway? Your logic is flawed, not mine. I noticed that those of you who disagree with me could not and will not answer my simple question, that's because your answer would only provide affirmation that what I'm saying is true.

Speaking of “missing the point”...

I was using an "extreme example" (as you call it, Dan) to bring attention to the absurdity of you making broad generalizations while speaking in absolutes.

Aren’t you touchy when a complete stranger makes unwarranted assumptions about you? It’s cute, really. Perhaps you should take your own advice, which you gave to Br. Devon earlier, and "Lighten up."

[Dorian Gray]

Speaking of “missing the point”...

I was using an "extreme example" (as you call it, Dan) to bring attention to the absurdity of you making broad generalizations while speaking in absolutes.

Aren’t you touchy when a complete stranger makes unwarranted assumptions about you? It’s cute, really. Perhaps you should take your own advice, which you gave to Br. Devon earlier, and "Lighten up."

second post today that I wish we had a like button!

[Atwater Vitki]

I'm afraid I'd have to side with those that said... "Put the money on the table!" Hypothetical and real offers affect me completely different.

If we are playing the “What if?” game, I could come up with a zillion zingers for sure, but if you had a briefcase with 10,000 Franklin$ in front of me I would have to suggest my morals, ethics, social norms, personal preferences would be greatly influenced by my level of desperation at the moment...and everyone can climb down off the big, bright, white horse if you think you wouldn't at least be tempted concerning any number of things regarding your personal moral sense.

Br. Devon mentioned his 4 months of homelessness and destitute conditions, my wife spent 5 months in like situations, myself 7 months (long before we were married) and I/we know a number of folks that have done from 2 months, to one friend, several years. I highly suggest living in like circumstances, for a minimum of 3 months before you answer this or any other question concerning your personal morals and ethics and what you would or would not do for that money.

Br. Devon also listed an admirable set of helps for society that I would be inclined to do similar as well as extend several programs for animals. Invest, reinvest the returns would only be 'smart'.

[Rev. Octopus]

I'll not bother responding to the last couple pages of posts with personal attacks taking each other out of context. I'd prefer to respond to the original post.

What would I do for a million dollars? My answer would depend on my situation at the time. At this moment, I have a decent job, so does my wife, and we are relatively debt-free (aside from our house payments). At this moment, I do not NEED a million dollars. It would only be luxury. Based on that, I would not pretend to be something I am not. I would not harm anyone. I would do nothing that would, on the whole, harm society.

Since that much money would be a very nice luxury (early retirement, travel the world, help a LOT of people, etc.), I would be willing to do all sorts of things I would normally not do. I would not do anything sexual with anyone else, because I value my happy marriage far higher than I do that stack of money. However, if my wife were to go along with it, I might do some unusual sexual things for the money. Let's see... I would pose nude (though I doubt many people would want to see that) or ride a bicycle naked downtown (assuming I would not be in danger of doing serious jail time). I would be willing to eat some fairly disgusting things, if it were not dangerous to my health... maybe something like balut, grubs or insects. I would urinate on any religious or sacred object or book (unless it was a rare historical artifact and urinating on it would destroy it... for example, I would not urinate on the Mona Lisa for a million dollars).

Now, suppose my situation were different. If we were jobless, in serious debt, unable to afford needed food or medicine, I am sure I would be willing to do far more things against my values, in proportion to my needs. In cases of desperation, I would probably even be willing to harm others, if it meant relieving harm to myself and my loved ones. Fortunately I am not in that level of need, and hopefully our society will become more caring about those in need so that nobody would ever be put in such a desperate situation.

- Rev. Octopus

[Dan56]

Speaking of “missing the point”...

I was using an "extreme example" (as you call it, Dan) to bring attention to the absurdity of you making broad generalizations while speaking in absolutes.

Aren’t you touchy when a complete stranger makes unwarranted assumptions about you? It’s cute, really. Perhaps you should take your own advice, which you gave to Br. Devon earlier, and "Lighten up."

Trust me, I got the point. You are probably correct, in that I made a broad assumption that everyone would react similarly under certain circumstances. I did not single out any specific individual, but evidently under-estimated that some would take it so personal. For that, I apologize, it certainly wasn't my intention to be offensive. Right or wrong, it was just my general opinion. I still think that given the choice of living or dying, that most people would steal some food in order to live, but apparently there are a few who wouldn't steal under any circumstances. I'll try not to use 'extreme' examples anymore to make a point. I don't believe I'm touchy and I was never insulted. I just didn't understand your logic in asserting that if Dan would steal some food to feed a starving child, that Dan would also molest a child. The two acts didn't correlate because the first helps a child while the second was detrimental. Thanks for explaining that it was just a sarcastic rebuttal, I can appreciate that.

[Bluecat]

I've eaten dog, though I didn't find out until the next day that that was what we'd been feasting on. In a hospitality situation one doesn't always ask - and the feast also included wasp grubs in honey and far too much dodgy Chinese champagne.

Mike's original question was (I think) what wouldn't you do to get a million dollars that you wouldn't otherwise get.

Then it moved on to the question of what would we do in order to survive.

Both questions are related to where one draws the line.

I wouldn't eat human flesh for a million dollars (I think: would anyone like to test me? Cos I could use a million... pounds sterling, at any rate).

But if it was eating human flesh or certain death, and if the human was already dead, then, frankly, I'd rather live than not.

But I would not torture even to survive, I hope.

[Kimmy]

Trust me, I got the point. You are probably correct, in that I made a broad assumption that everyone would react similarly under certain circumstances. I did not single out any specific individual, but evidently under-estimated that some would take it so personal. For that, I apologize, it certainly wasn't my intention to be offensive. Right or wrong, it was just my general opinion. I still think that given the choice of living or dying, that most people would steal some food in order to live, but apparently there are a few who wouldn't steal under any circumstances. I'll try not to use 'extreme' examples anymore to make a point. I don't believe I'm touchy and I was never insulted. I just didn't understand your logic in asserting that if Dan would steal some food to feed a starving child, that Dan would also molest a child. The two acts didn't correlate because the first helps a child while the second was detrimental. Thanks for explaining that it was just a sarcastic rebuttal, I can appreciate that.

Thank you, Dan.