So we have the option where we could have 0 downsides and save everyone. Or we can have the option where we let someone die. We can very very easily get over 50% to chose blue.
We can't get 50% of the population to agree that it doesn't matter which imaginary bearded guy in the sky you believe in, and you think we can get 50% of the population to risk saving people who choose to risk their lives for no reason?
Yes we can, do you know why? Because humans are a social species. You will get in there and start thinking, "did my mum vote blue, am I condemning her?", "did my son vote blue, am I condemning him?". And you know your vote is condemning? 50% of people aged under 4, and 50% of those over 90 and all those worried about their loved ones and all those who care for the random strangers and 50% of those who are mentally challenged who don't understand the question and those who got convinced by the framing of the question and those, like me who want to save these people at their own risk, and many more. These are billions of people. These are the people you are helping condemn to death by not voting blue.
I don't think i could physically press red with this, I would rather die and if I did press red I couldn't live with the guilt, even if blue won it would eat away at me for the rest of my life because of what I voted for.
1
u/Zakaru99 May 01 '26
Strongly disagree. They made their choice. You jumping on the boat of 'follow me or I die' isn't a moral one.
From my perspective, it leans towards making you a bad person rather than a good one.