I say winning a deserving group rights.  Saving someone's life is great but in the situation you're more obliged to than anything else.  This poll doesn't count things the Average Joe is unlikely to accomplish.

saving a life even going so far as sacrificing your own life to save that someone.

saving a life even going so far as sacrificing your own life to save that someone.


Actually, come to think of it, if it involves self sacrifice it is the best deed. If it's stopping someone from choking, it's a great deed but when you think about it you'd be or dumazz or arsehole for not doing it.

Well no individual alone can help a group, but one individual can completely change another person's life for the better, so I somewhat arbitrarily give that my vote.

Well no individual alone can help a group, but one individual can completely change another person's life for the better, so I somewhat arbitrarily give that my vote.


True for the most part, but MLK did a lot for his race.  Although maybe he wasn't quite an Average Joe.

True for the most part, but MLK did a lot for his race.  Although maybe he wasn't quite an Average Joe.


Well, he was an Average Joe in the best sense of the word.  He wasn't an elected official, or even in government, and he certainly had no money, no social contacts, or political influence in the traditional sense, certainly not when he began. 

And he hardly did it alone.

Saving a life

Tanya

Saving a life.

Well, he was an Average Joe in the best sense of the word.  He wasn't an elected official, or even in government, and he certainly had no money, no social contacts, or political influence in the traditional sense, certainly not when he began. 

And he hardly did it alone.


Good point. I'd say it still beats saving a life unless you sacrificed your own in order to do it.

Saving a life.




Cat

I didn't vote - and wou'nt - because the only one I could not vote for is #4, converting someone.  All the others could be defended.  But what right does anyone have to try to impose their faith on another?  To me, that is vastly different than trying to convince another of a political or intellectual view, or an interpretstion of obsevable facts.  Keep your faith out of my face and out of our laws, but try to convince me that your views of public policy are to the good of all.  One I reject, the other I embrace.

Good point, Don Carlos.

I didn't vote - and wou'nt - because the only one I could not vote for is #4, converting someone.  All the others could be defended.  But what right does anyone have to try to impose their faith on another?  To me, that is vastly different than trying to convince another of a political or intellectual view, or an interpretstion of obsevable facts.  Keep your faith out of my face and out of our laws, but try to convince me that your views of public policy are to the good of all.  One I reject, the other I embrace.

I couldn't agree more, Don Carlos.

I respect the right of all people to follow their own faith convictions, assuming of course that their resulting actions do not do harm to the wider community. I expect the same respect from others and I find it highly objectionable when other people try (as has happened on many occasions) to "convert me" to their "true" faith.

Unfortunately it appears that many organised religions embrace evangelism as a central tenet of the faith (and I don't limit evangelism to Christianity here, I'm using the word in its broadest sense of militant zealousness). Hence people of faith are continually motivated to go out and preach in a variety of ways and everybody else gets it whether we like it or not.

I didn't vote - and wou'nt - because the only one I could not vote for is #4, converting someone.  All the others could be defended.  But what right does anyone have to try to impose their faith on another?  To me, that is vastly different than trying to convince another of a political or intellectual view, or an interpretstion of obsevable facts.  Keep your faith out of my face and out of our laws, but try to convince me that your views of public policy are to the good of all.  One I reject, the other I embrace.


^^ What he said

I couldn't agree more, Don Carlos.

I respect the right of all people to follow their own faith convictions, assuming of course that their resulting actions do not do harm to the wider community. I expect the same respect from others and I find it highly objectionable when other people try (as has happened on many occasions) to "convert me" to their "true" faith.

Unfortunately it appears that many organised religions embrace evangelism as a central tenet of the faith (and I don't limit evangelism to Christianity here, I'm using the word in its broadest sense of militant zealousness). Hence people of faith are continually motivated to go out and preach in a variety of ways and everybody else gets it whether we like it or not.


One time, while helping my parants carry groceries into the house, I had a case of beer on my shoulder and was accosted by some Mormons, berating my for my sinfull ways.  What a drag.  I offered them a beer.  They left in disgust.  Good riddence.