I was sitting in my “History of America in the 60′s” class and the professor posed a question that obviously blew a few fuses in the minds of nubile freshmen.
The question posed was: “You’re on your back porch, and you have train tracks that run across next to your land, but not on your property. You see a baby caught in the traintracks, and you hear the train coming. The train eventually comes and kills the baby.
Should there be a law that requires you to help that baby?”
Of course, the students in the class had a hard time balancing the moral responsibility of the person with the slippery slope of the law. Some kids were absolutely unwavering. One girl said, “If that person doesn’t help, that person should NOT be on the fucking streets of America.”
Still others felt it was the law’s duty to force people out of personal choice, “It should be common courtesy. But people aren’t stepping up in modern society, so maybe we should make it a law.”
I’m glad to see that, even when posed with a theorhetical question, students are still unable to grasp the concept of personal choice. Hilarious.
In other news, the campus’ Athiest Club (United Atheist Alliance? I don’t know what the hell they’re called) was out in force, standing with two drenched sandwich boards in the amphitheater. The absurdity of the club need not be covered here, so instead I’d like to make an announcement:
We are starting the University of Oregon Nilhist’s Club.
We won’t meet anywhere, and we won’t do anything.
Glad to be back.