posted on Apr, 29 2005 @ 12:45 PM
I know this plays on the tender sensibilties of many, but no, I'm not trying to start an argument or be a point whore, but....
I see a lot of this relativism going on comparing the loss of life of women and children to the loss of male life. We're talking about innocents,
here. Just people who are minding their own business and happen to get dead just by being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
But what really is the point? What is the value of life in total when we constantly put the value of one over another on the basis of age or gender?
It's the 21st century now, and I see no need to discriminate in this fashion. Death itself doesn't discriminate, does it? I thought not.
This 'women and children first' idea certainly is nice and polite and in line with common societal morality, but it doesn't really follow any logic
or reason. In times past, women and children weren't really getting things done like men were, so why squander the production value of a male for the
mere chivalry of the jesture?
I don't mean to come off as someone who has a dead, black heart, but my point is that there are those in the media and politics who would simply use
this common bias to enflame the emotions of others to project an agenda, when it is apparent that they care very little to the lives of the women and
children compared to the agenda. That is all.