Posts from Your morality.

Many here believe that there is Absolute Light and Absolute Darkness. So... Imagine this situation. The First Crusade, you are in the crusader army, and after taking the city, the commander orders all prisoners to be killed. Among them is a six-year-old boy. You can save him, risking your life. But... you can also carry out the order and take on the sin of killing an innocent person... although the pilgrimage will absolve all sins, so what difference does it make if there are more or fewer... What would YOU do? P.S. In a month, I will give an answer to all possible scenarios.

I... I will save him. And then I will atone for my sin...

I won't take that sin upon myself – I won't kill an innocent child. This pilgrimage isn't a pilgrimage – it's nonsense – murder won't hide the heart's wounds, won't conceal secret thoughts, won't end the pain of this world.:cool:

I would save him and all the children there – the risk to my life is insignificant.

Alex and the rest – more clarity!

Killing to save an innocent, or even many innocents, is not a sin. I will save the blameless.

I made myself clear!!! Read the question's conditions... so, did you leave him alive? If yes, don't assign any value; if no, assign a value to his reputation.

I will save him! And it's not out of fear of divine punishment! Children are sacred! As a woman, I simply can't act otherwise! It's maternal instinct! Even at the cost of my own life! Now imagine that this baby is your son? Could you kill him? Or if you found out that someone had done this to him? How would you feel? Even the dark ones have a heart!

I won't kill the child... A child is not evil... I might even defend this kid in front of the commander... let them kill.

They stand and watch the murder – this is complicity.

No, OptiMAL!! Let them kill me!! I said I would stand between the child and the commander... let THEM KILL ME!!!!!!! But the child must live – because he is our future.

I absolutely don't care what they do to me – I won't allow them to kill the weak! I am physically weak, but I don't care about that either. My cherished dream is to die for my faith or for my homeland. Or for both. However silly it may sound.

I won't let anyone harm a child. I'll rescue them, no matter the risks. And if we're talking about it, I wouldn't participate in such crusades against Urgash. It's not my thing. Crusades, attempts to impose one's faith – these are all ideas of the Light, and I am as dark as the moonless night. The Dark live as they please and don't interfere with others doing the same.

Viz, that's not silly! I was right, wasn't I?;) The main thing is not to lose faith in our complex life! And to die for a just cause is the best death! I would rather save a child and die than kill!

Added 2 minutes later
The Crusades were not about faith, but about politics! You can't impose faith! You can believe!

The only two unacceptable things, even in war, are sexual violence and the killing of children. If it were necessary to kill or interrogate adult prisoners (regardless of gender), I would do it, because, according to the premise, I am at war, and many means are justified there.

No Optimal!! Let them kill me!! I said I would stand between the child and the commander... let THEM KILL ME!!!!!!! but the child must live - because it is our future

Sorry, I didn't read it all:o

Let's differentiate between two concepts: a participant in the Crusade and a person from the 21st century who puts themselves in that participant's shoes. The answers will be completely different accordingly. In the 11th-12th centuries, the problem of humanism didn't exist. Any knight could kill a child, a woman, or an old man without hesitation, even themselves, if necessary. On the other hand, during the First Crusade, a commander's order for a knight was more of a recommendation than a strict instruction. Therefore, a knight from the First Crusade would kill captured Saracens without hesitation, even without an order. Can you imagine their state when they were walking through the desert, without food or water, under constant attacks from Muslims? When they stormed Jerusalem, there was such a massacre; they killed everyone, regardless of gender or age. So, as a participant in the First Crusade, I would kill without hesitation. Now, let's consider another situation. I IMAGINE myself as a participant in the First Crusade. I have a certain upbringing, certain stereotypes. That is, everyone around me says that you shouldn't kill children. What could the answer be to the question? Of course: "Save them, risking my life." Everyone knows that this is the "right" answer. And it's easy to reason while sitting at home in front of a computer, knowing that you won't actually suffer. It's easy to be brave from a distance. And even be a "civilized" person. And therefore, my answer is: I would kill without hesitation, even before the commander's order. They practically didn't take prisoners at all; what would they do with them in the desert? They killed everyone and killed everything, regardless of their beliefs.