Posted on 05/26/2011 8:31:11 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
Tell me you recognized that as sarcasm.
It shouldn't have needed a sarcasm tag.
By the way I feel the same about people who drive fast cars in circles -it is pointless.
Millions of people do take a risk driving to work every day,and they take that risk to provide a living for their family.Nor is the odds of death 1 in 20 for each trip.
Now if he had expended great effort fighting some injustice,then I would count him some kind of hero.
But people who die of some highly dangerous sport don't get my sympathy.
It was an ego trip ,and maybe he was an adrenaline junkie.
Oh yeah,I don't worship at the altar of Teddy Roosevelt.TR raised a private regiment to join an unjust war against Spain ,greatly expanded federal power over land,and then formed a third party out of egotism when his party rejected his bid for another term.Of course he did have the courage to go on safari and kill off the rarest Afican beasts while calling it conservation and sporting. Bah!Rich egotists may do as they please but that doesn't mean the world is bound to applaud.
If it is their profession, then I have sympathy. When a Sherpa dies on Everest, it is a tragedy.
For these adrenaline junky fathers of young children who perish on Mount Everest, I can have no more sympathy for them than I would for the drug addict who dies of an overdose or the drunk driver who drives over a cliff.
They have all died doing what they love to do.
Drugs, Drinking, climbing. They are all done for the purpose of satisfying some inner personal and selfish need. What is the difference?
You tell me that you’re kidding...
Of course your post was sarcasm...and I added my remark in agreement with most on the thread suggesting that this fellow acted selfishly in light of the fact that he left behind and three year old child.
I used your remark to emphasis the point...(no sarcasm)
Hmm. When it comes to things like this, there are two types of people in the world. Those that have to conquer something because it is there, and those that are content to live a more quiet life.
This man very likely wanted to climb Everest because it is HARD. There is satisfaction in accomplishing something hard and that few have done or can do. Those people that are content to live a quiet life do not understand this.
Hoosier, as you said, you don’t understand the Indy 500—but people want to win the Indy 500 because it is hard, and accomplishing it is a great feat. These people, whether they are AJ Foyt or this fellow (but they are all high achievers), are driven to greatness. That’s how they are.
He wanted to climb Everest because it is there. Word.
I respectfully disagree.
I have observed that people do such hard but ultimately purposeless things, like climbing Mount Everest or running 100 mile races (and I’m not talking about professional runners or mountain climbers), not just because they are hard, but to be able to brag to others, and to gain in social status. No one would do it if they were sworn to secrecy.
Years ago we were visiting friends who told of a mutual friend, young man, late 30’s/early 40’s at the time, getting stranded someplace up in the Andes while taking on a mountain climbing adventure. I went on a total RANT about what a selfish SOB he was, doing that knowing he could leave 3 young children behind. When you have young children, or are expecting a child, you do not take unnecessary risks with your life for your own pleasure. Period.
He was selfish to book the trip to start with. He not only had a pregnant wife but he had two other children under the age of five. Those kids need a dad who is there to help them grow up.
People talk about the $80,000. He obviously was a rich man so the impact of losing the $80,000 is immaterial to the moral choice he made. He took $80,000 from the family wealth bucket to spend on his dream. So now the $80,000 is gone and so is he.
As someone else pointed out when young children lose their dads because of war or in the line of duty of being a firefighter or policeman it is really tragic. Those kid have a hard time understanding how duty could be more important than them. This was not duty. He risked his life on an adventure and lost the gamble. Now his kids will miss out on his relationship for the rest of their lives.
Climbing a big rock or going really,really fast in a circle is no doubt hard and dangerous;but being the 1000th to do it seems pointless.
The Indy 500 and the rest of the races have rules and artificial restrictions holding down the speed.The Indy as a proving ground in the first 70 years was one thing,but once the cars became too fast for the track and had to be slowed by rule,then you are only testing reaction times and driving skill.
To be honest I really could care less about most pro sports from cars to ballgames ,except that they demand my taxes pay for their playpens,.... errr stadiums, where the team owners and union players become filthy rich.Why don't they pay for their own stadiums.
Conversely I am all for people actually playing softball,baseball,basketball,golf,archery, or even Foosball!
Nothing wrong with good exercise of mind and body with reasonable risk.
People who undertake very-high-risk sports should also be prepared for criticism.
In the hobby of amateur radio there are dozens who spend lots of money to be part of a group that travels to territory with dangerous weather or dangerous people .A number of them have paid with their lives .Now is it really such a great thing to drown trying to be one of the few who made a radio conversation from a guano-covered rock in freezing water or shot by trigger-happy bandits or government gunboats ?
Oh by all means,let those people take a 1 in 10 or 1 in 20 chance of dying while pursuing some thrill.Just don't expect me to applaud.
I agree, even if his idea of worthwhile risks don’t entirely coincide with mine.
Also, his daughter was born premature, and his death occurred some time after his coming down with what killed him. It was his third child, and between him and his wife anyway. Lighten up on motes in others’ eyes as someone once said, moralizers.
There have always been filthy rich people who laugh at those with less material wealth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.