Which of the following statements do you agree most passionately with? (If you agree passionately with more than one, please force a choice between/among them)
Absurd Hypothetical scenario: You need to rely, in an emergency, on a 25-year-old man to babysit your 8-year-old son. He is almost a complete stranger -- you know only one fact about him. Which of the following facts would make you the LEAST likely to want him to babysit your child?
You have to apportion blame, mathematically, for the situation in the Middle East. Mathematically, one side will get more than 50 percent blame. Even if the distinction is minuscule, which side gets MORE than 50 percent blame?
Do you agree EVEN A LITTLE BIT with the conclusion of this statement?

The assassination of late-term abortion doctor George Tiller was a serious crime, and his vigilante killer should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, but it's hard to call this an outright tragedy because his death helps curtail an immoral practice.
If you could go back in time and influence Harry Truman's brain in August 1945, would you:
Let’s say that CIA files clearly prove that waterboarding and other brutal interrogation techniques did, in fact, generate valuable information that helped bring dangerous terrorists to justice, and may have thwarted other terrorist plots. And let's say the misinformation and deception we received through these methods were not particularly hurtful to us. Do you think we should continue to use these techniques on high-level suspected terrorists?
Okay, we have a ticking-bomb, massive death scenario! To get the information out of the terrorist, is it okay to torture his 9-year-old son in the father's presence, if that tactic was very likely to get the information and save tens of thousands of lives?