I will not contradict myself

Sorry about not answering those other questions, was confused #2 - Your decision is made prior to the swap/torture/release. So you are making with your mind in your body. After you make the decision, he will then release the body-mind pair you decided to release, and torture the other. So you can decide to release what will be your body-other mind or other body-your mind. Which would you have released? I am slightly confusby the question asked here, but I would not have my partner totured. I would give them a functioning mind, so they could live their life. I also find this qustion ridiculous, as this would never ever happen in reaf life, so it's almost virtually impossible to answer. #5 - The car is completely disassembled, even the engine, into its most basic constituent parts. Then it is reassembled using those same exact parts. Is it the same car? It's still the same car, it's just consisted of different parts. #7 - In line with the clarification above, this has nothing to do with the swapped minds scenario. Given that, I will take "I would not go through [with] the operation" as your answer unless you object.#9 - The question is in regards to actions where I don't have a choice, even a choice whether or not I want to engage in it. If I have no choice, am I still morally responsible? If I have no choice, thhan I'm not morally responsible...but someone is. Thank you. In light of the four restatements above, I will limit the new questions this round to 6. New Questions 1. Similar to #4 above: Consider an event that no person is responsible for, like a tornado. Also consider that this tornado destroys a house and kills the family inside and that no one is responsible for that causal connection. That is, no one is responsible for the fact that the tornado destroyed the house and killed the people. Is it then logical to conclude that no human is responsible for the death of the family? I believe that it's logical to conclude that a human did not make the tornado, but someone is at fualt. Weather it be the weather man for not explaining the tornado properly, or the people unwillingness to lieave the area. 2. Similar to #5 above: Can the logical principle above be generalized? That is, can we say that for any event X for which no one is responsible; and a causal connection "X causes Y" for which no one is responsible; can we say, then, that no human is responsible for Y? Yes you can. If something that humans don't have power over, than it's not their fault. 3. You are courier delivering important medical supplies to help combat a disease epidemic. On your way to the delivery site, you come to a fork in the road. You know that the path on the left is clear, but longer. You estimate that, out of the 1,200 victims, 800 (2/3) will die before you can get to the site. The path on the right is shorter, but not always clear. If it is clear (1/3 chance), then you can get there in time to save everyone, if it is not clear (2/3 chance) then you won't get there in time to save anyone and all 1,200 will die. Let's assume that the numbers here are accurate and beyond questioning, which path do you take? I think that in the heat of the moment I would go to the clear path and longer path. I never want people to die by ny means, but I want people to live that have a higher ercent of chance. I would pray that the people knew Jesus. 4. Does God define what is moral? That is, does the moral quality of an act derive solely from God's will? Yes it does. God says what is moral, and what's not. 5. If you can save someone from harm at absolutely no cost to yourself, are you morally obligated to do so? I think it's dependant on the situation, but if someone is in real pysical harm, than I would go save them in a heartbeat. I am moally obligated to due so, as that is what Jesus would do. 6. In continuation of #5, if you deliberately refrain from helping the person, and sit idly by as they come to harm, are you, in any way, morally responsible for that harm? Yes you are. If you didn't help them, and they get injured, then you are responsible along side the person who was beating the other person.