Hey guys, let's discuss something.

[V]

Ok, here's the scenario:

There are a group of men, women and children traveling through indian land. As they are guiding their little wagons, a group of indians jump out and attack the people.

Two groups of four people; a women, and her three children, one of which is an infant run to hide behind a bush on both sides of this road they were traveling. Still with me?

Now, the babies start crying, and attract the attention of the indians. The one group is killed off. All four people. Now, the mother in the other group kills her crying baby, and the indians leave due to the fact they couldn't find the group.

Which mother acted morally?

[The artist formally known]

Should have killed the baby in the first place.

But if she really wanted that stinky mess of a baby she should have did what she did to the baby to the people trying to kill her. DUH

[ncba93ivyase]

Better to kill a whiny little child and save the majority than to have them all die,

[V]

Better to kill a whiny little child and save the majority than to have them all die,

For the greater good! mango

[V]

So, anyone else think they are able to kill off their infant to save your other 3 children and yourself? 

[FAMY2]

 Neither. The Mom should of fed the baby to get it to shut up. It would shut all of you up.  Men that is.  educate;

[Kalahari Inkantation]

Or, y'know, she could've knocked the baby out. :\

[Gitominoti]

This is a hard one. I'd go have to go with the mother who killed her own baby. Either the baby dies, and the rest are saved, or everyone dies, including the baby. Either way, it would have died

[ncba93ivyase]

Or, y'know, she could've knocked the baby out. :\

And dealt with mentally retarded kid for the rest of her life?

[Kalahari Inkantation]

And dealt with mentally retarded kid for the rest of her life?

What if she knocked it out, and it woke up perfectly fine?
It doesn't HAVE to be retarded after it wakes up.