This blog section is going soft!  Where are the debates and name-calling?  Oh well.  I suppose we can be civilized until the next war comes along.  For the better I suppose.  Times of peace are necessary on occasion.

I am a libertarian, or so I'm told.  But I'm trying to sincerely understand the other side.  I obviously won't get it if I try to grasp their view way over there on the left side of the spectrum.  First I need to understand the half way point.  I assume you lefty's aren't just uneducated.  You must have a point.  I want to understand.

Let me set up a hypothetical.

You just took out $1,000 from your bank in cash with which you were going to buy a luxury item.

Before you reach the store, you walk into a wrong building and find yourself in a room with a glass window connecting you to another room where you can view a stranger.

It is clearly explained to you that the person will be shot in 5 minutes if you do not push the button in front of you.  You don't know if he deserves to be shot.  But, to push that button in front of you, you must give up your $1,000 in cash.  It costs $1,000 in cash to push this button.

Three questions:

1) If you do not push the button and keep your $1,000 - should you be convicted of a crime?  (not 'will you be convicted' under current laws.  But should you be convicted?)

2) Let's say the third party person that created this game, the creator, knew that the stranger on the other side of the glass was going to get shot by someone else unless he came up with $1,000 that he didn't have. So my second question: Should the creator be convicted of a crime if he instead held a gun to you and forced you to give him the $1,000 to save this person?

3) If you were the 'creator' - would you give the person with the $1,000 a choice to push the button himself or would you hold a gun to him and force him to give you the $1000 to save the other person? 

This has political implications.  I'm doing some self-discovery as to what the government/creator should be allowed to do and what the rights of each individual is truly worth and if they have a right to each of their rights... at any cost. 

This hypothetical is extreme, but it's the first step in discovering if these issues are black and white or if there is a gray area.  Your thoughts are appreciated.

I have no agenda or debate that I am looking for to prove my views.  I'm just looking for the 'best' answer.