I saw this post on Facebook. I thought I should share this here :) Its quite interesting.

Considering the law we follow currently, stealing falls right under the things one shouldn't do. This is quite a complicated situation, either Heinze follows the law and lets his wife die, or he breaks it and hopes she survives. Even though the chance of his wife surviving is 50%, I believe he should have stolen the drug for his wife. I also know that its what I would do if my wife was dieing. Yes it's illegal to steal and against the law, however the worst that could happen if he stole would be some jail time but at the end he would go back home to his living wife due to his actions. On the contrary, he doesn't serve any jail time but lives with the fact that his wife is dead.

Putting myself in Heize's shoes, I would do it. I would steal and break the law to save my wife. However, if the stakes were higher and if I didn't have to steal, and would had to kill someone, I probably wouldn't do so. It depends on the situation and the consequences as murdering someone can result to prison. This brings me to question the law system, laws are made and should be followed however they are always bend due to the situation. Comparing stealing to murder, they are both illegal and wrong, but they both have different consequences and effect. Its a complicated and delicate situation as some might think Heize's actions are 'right' because he was stealing for a loved one. However If he had killed instead of stealing, the numbers siding with Heinze would be different. Does this mean that people think stealing isn't as bad as killing? What If the stakes were higher and he robbed a bank. Would it be any different than robbing a chemical to save his wife? This shows loop holes in the law system. Its almost as if the law system is there, but not always followed. Judges may shrug to Heinz stealing a chemical to save a loved one, but might not if Heize were to rob a bank. The law is firm on its rules however the situation definitely impacts the rules and sometimes causes judges to bend the law. I believe that its okay to do so, the law to me is like guidelines to live properly in a society, however when one doesnt follow the rules, punishment should be given. But, the effect and the magnitude of the punishment would vary depending on what the guilty person (Heinze) did. I believe that the punishment given to Heinze would be a lot worse if he had robbed a bank compared to stealing a chemical.

"However, if the stakes were higher and if I didn't have to steal, and would had to kill someone, I probably wouldn't do so."

Does this make me a selfish person? I would be willing to put myself through jail time to save my wife, however not prison? Does this mean that everyone is selfish to a degree? I would choose not to save my wife if it meant prison for me, does that mean that at the end of the day, I care about my well being more than my wife's? This brings me to a troubling thought as to whatever I do for someone, I think about the impact of that on me? And if it has a good impact on me, its fine but if it has a bad impact on me, I wouldn't do it. Is there any act that one does, willingly, without letting the consequences cloud their judgment?