[Loki123]

I'm a doctor and a pedophile came to me and he needed a surgery. I knew there were 8 people that could use his organs so I decided to make a mistake in the surgery. Those 8 people saw life because what I did but now I am in court and you all are the lawyers.

So, which cause would you support and why ?

[CEO]

this is pretty damn stupid!

cough cough-but funny hehe

[Rick]

You are the cunt in the scenario

[Loki123]

You're morally right, but legally wrong. You took an oath as a doctor to never decline service, and you broke that oath, but you saved many lives.

Are you morally right to decide on your own to take ones life ?

In my opinion, in neither case you are morally right. You can try to justify what the doctor did by saying the other person was a pedophile but doesn't make it morally right to take is life, does it ? Not to mention you don't know what or if the 8 other people are any better.

[The Real Slim Shady]

Wouldnt this make far more sense if we were the jury. Lawyers have nothing to do with who's innocent and who's guilty in a courtroom...

[Nil]

A pedophile isn't the same as a child molester. Of course the question doesn't specify if he's ever harmed children, so killing an innocent man for a sexual orientation of which he has very little control over isn't morally right in my opinion. We also get no information on the people it saved and we are not sure if those people would have been saved otherwise. These are decisions you don't get to make as a doctor and for good reason.

[mothered]

Based on the context of the statement, I cannot be definitive In answering your question.

Who's to say the "8 people that could use his organs" are not pedophiles themselves? Was the actual pedophile (who needed surgery) actually convicted, awaiting trial or just classed as a pedophile by the local community? There's too many probabilities.

[pvnk]

Based on the context of the statement, I cannot be definitive In answering your question.

Who's to say the "8 people that could use his organs" are not pedophiles themselves? Was the actual pedophile (who needed surgery) actually convicted, awaiting trial or just classed as a pedophile by the local community? There's too many probabilities.

In a court of law, you would be asked to make your best judgement.

There's actually only two probabilities.

Guilty or not guilty.

[Loki123]

Wouldnt this make far more sense if we were the jury. Lawyers have nothing to do with who's innocent and who's guilty in a courtroom...

No, it wouldn't. The jury doesn't make an argument on either sides behalf but they listen to the arguments from the lawyers. You are supposed to choose a side and to your best abilities substantiate your case.

Based on the context of the statement, I cannot be definitive In answering your question.

Who's to say the "8 people that could use his organs" are not pedophiles themselves? Was the actual pedophile (who needed surgery) actually convicted, awaiting trial or just classed as a pedophile by the local community? There's too many probabilities.

Yes, there are too many probabilities, that is technically the point of this question, it is too open for one to give a definitive answer but it is perfect to create an argument about what is right or wrong in both legal and moral view points.

[The Real Slim Shady]

No, it wouldn't. The jury doesn't make an argument on either sides behalf but they listen to the arguments from the lawyers. You are supposed to choose a side and to your best abilities substantiate your case.

Except that doesn't make sense.

You don't choose your lawyers after you enter the courtroom. And lawyers don't get to choose their side. If they're the Prosecution it's because the Crown has decided to press charges and it's their job to prosecute. They can't just say "Hey, I think he's innocent so I'm not going to do my job"