TheFlyingChinchilla 2010-11-30 14:13:30

Most answers seem pretty clear... baby begone.

I wouldn't say any of these are as screwy as those who defend the rights of the unborn in obstruction of the rights of the living.

LiderBoss 2010-11-30 14:45:20

It doesn't matter who is going to push the "world destruction" button, if someone is about to push it, you should stop him/her in anyway you can since if he/she pushes the button, he/she dies anyway...

I believe if you have to choose between and old person or a young person, the old person should die simply because he had a chance to live his/her life and the younger person didn't.

DemiseAnimation 2010-11-30 16:38:20

If a baby was next to a doomsday button I would crossbow it and stamp on its head

Gianni 2010-11-30 18:16:51

A crossbow that uses live babies as ammunition sounds like something only an evil baby could construct. Better take the shot.

Evil babies are twice as dangerous as evil old people, because the babies can deceive so easily. However, good babies aren't nearly as useful as good old people, because good babies aren't going to do much except cost their owner money.

So really I'd just say that all babies are evil, take the shot.

TheFlyingChinchilla 2010-11-30 18:56:59

Well, you were correct about the part where they suck out your soul...

KhawnerL 2010-11-30 20:28:26

release the hounds..

Gemparty 2010-11-30 21:02:49

...
I want that crossbow.
That would be AWESOME! :D

LyleRath 2010-12-17 04:22:20

This is a philosophical question that really hinges on the balance of two variables.

1. Do you like babies?
and
2. What do you want to accomplish?

I've never cared for babies myself. Disgusting little disproportionate pig like creatures, usually caked in some horrible bodily excrement; incapable of doing anything of value or even keeping themselves alive and yet somehow equipped with lungs strong enough to make obnoxiously high pitched noises disturbingly loud.

So basically in short, I just made a nice bit of money in baby crossbow crossbow sales (they're patented under the name babow BTW,) and I don't have much huggy love for poop filled noise machines that might prevent me from taking the shot.

As for the second variable, not shooting the baby and then getting blown up is out of the question for me. Now here's the tough part. I can shoot the baby with the other baby and stop the world from getting destroyed, but then that's only 2 babies dead, and there's a much more efficient use of ammo if baby killing is the goal. The most logical course of baby killing action would be to fire my babow at the button. That way, I kill like, infinity babies, and I actually get the credit for it. I could spend my whole life killing babies, and I still would never reach that number, but at least then I could say I had a murderous life to spend.

This is why I'm glad that my firefox search bar's random order of importance when I type in "newg" won't let me forget about your posts. They really make an individual evaluate the more meaningful things in life.

spacecowboy86 2011-01-03 00:35:52

Depends on whose baby it is, if they are nearby or still alive, and what the baby will grow up to be. If it will grow up to be an evil scientist or a drunk, I'm taking the shot. If it will grow up to become a president of the world, end all forms of death, and colonize mars, I'll just shoot it in the leg. The thing you really have to remember is that babies have futures, in fact they have more of a future than any of us, because they haven't wasted any of it eating potato chips and watching TV. Unless of course one of us is the e-trade baby... creepy thought.