In Bosnia, taxi drivers sympathic to the muslims were kidnapped and forced to make a 10 second decision on whether their wife or mother were killed. If they didn't answer, both were killed. Some decided and one was killed and one was released. These stories come from the taxi drivers.
So because you refuse to believe they'd let either live (knowing the above story and believing it to be true since it was told by a person who lived it) - you'd still let both die?
You're being a bit evasive. We're basing this horrible scenario on the fact that you go into this knowing this "group" will release one of them (since they have in previous instances)
So you know they'll let one go, but because you are 100% sure they wouldn't want to live with the memories, you'd let both die?
No therapy for the memories and use the extra time here for them to parent or contribute? What if one of them was on the verge of a cure for cancer and just needed another 6 months in the lab? You'd still let them die?
I hope my basis for this retarded and uncomfortable continuation of this scenario isn't escaping you. (I fully admit I'm the one posing the retarded scenarios here)
Yeah, this is a likely scenario; one we should base our most profound moral decisions on.
You watch too much television.
Real life is actually lived in the exact opposite order: you decide what your moral code is, and then use it to guide you through each situation you encounter.