Rollo Tomassi said:
Would you be willing to murder an innocent person if it meant you could end millions dying from world hunger?
If a new medicine could prevent cancer, but would would cause a fatal reaction in 10% of the population, would you release it to the public?
You're a struggling musician who's just discovered your GF is pregnant, but fortunately you've just been offered a very lucrative recording deal if you'll only compromise your musical style and cater to the requests of the record label. Do you compromise yourself artistically and take the deal or continue to struggle to make ends meet with a GF who wants you to marry and settle down with your new child?
Someone very close to you is dying from a very painful disease. He's paralyzed and will die within a month. He begs you to give him a poison that will end his suffering. Do you do it?
Say you had the power to make a slot machine give a jackpot at will. Your mother needs money for rent this month or she'll be evicted. Do you use your power?
While parking late at night you happen to slightly scrape the side of a Porsche. You are certain that no one has seen what's happened. The damage is minor and wouldn't be covered by insurance. Do you leave a note for the owner?
By controlling medical research funds you are in the position to guarantee a cure for any disease in 15 years. Unfortunately no progress would be made on any other disease in this time. Would you target one disease?
You and a person you deeply love are placed in separate rooms with a button next to each of you. You know you will both be killed unless one of you presses your button before 1 hour passes. The first to press the button will save the other person, but you will be immediately killed. What do you do?
I've got a million more just like this. Nothing is black & white, nothing is binary.
Hey Rollo. You throw this bait out to get me into this thread. Up to now, LATINOMAN has been smacking these posters around like a possy of litte boys.
It is time for GURU to come in and deliver a few knock out punches and put these SHEEP to sleep.
Foremost, I think anybody who WOULD take a stance against INTEGRITY in any manner is clearly doing it for either of two reasons:
1- The Exercise of Debate
2 - Serious Character Flaw
Clearly, the PROPOSED if's you have suggested is simply taking a man of integrity and presenting him with this circumstance:
TWO OF YOUR RULES ARE IN JEOPARDY. YOU MUST PICK ONE TO BREAK THE OTHER. WHICH ONE WILL IT BE?
The answer is which ever rule is of most importance in your hierarchy of moral code. If TAKING CARE OF YOUR FAMILY is RULE # 1 and NOT STEALING is RULE #4, you will CHOOSE Rule # 1.
It is quite simple actually. This does not mean the MAN lacks intergrity. You put him a situation where to adhere to one rule, he must break another. By doing nothing, he is not adhering to one rule.
So the answer to your dilemna is a MAN of INTEGRITY will adhere to the rule that is of most importance to his MORAL CODE.
Certainly no GREY AREAS there. LOL
Let's get to the HEART of the matter,
The issue of INTEGRITY and its importance lies in your NATURE vs CONVICTION.
Should I attain money wrongfully to better my tangible life?
Should I sell myself out to get ahead?
Should I sleep with UNAVAILABLE women to satisfy my sexual desire?
Should I DISRESPECT myself to satify a desire?
Should I call my X?
How do I ........?
How can I...........?
Do I .............?
When will ...........?
Why .................?
These are the questions where INTEGRITY makes the difference.
And truth be told MR. ROLLO, if MEN these days had INTEGRITY, SoSuave would not be SWAMPED with AFCism. Thus it is the lack of integrity which has created this forum.