Here is a hypothetical scenario of all of you interested in ethics and ponies

You are approached one day by a familiar looking god, she claims to have looked into the dreams of many in your world and feeling sympathetic has opened a one way gateway to Equestria. The goddess wishes to alleviate the suffering of someone by bringing the sole sufferer to her paradise world, in all her might however can only bring one person and is unsure who to take with her and asks your opinion.

Being an honest soul though she tells you some simple rules about your choice
1. You must chose someone to send along, fully sentient and human beings only

2. She will have no prior knowledge of however you send across

3. You only have to give her advice, you can tell her to look for an individual with certain traits, however she cannot guarantee she will find someone who will embody all of them.

4. She will hold herself responsible for caring for the human once in Equestria, this includes being acceptable for any damage done by the chosen individual once in Equestria

5. She cannot take you along with her, she apologises but there is something preventing you from stepping inside the portal despite your best attempts

Finally she acknowledges that you are mortal and while being a benevolent rules she will remember you if you decide to send a sociopath over to Equestria to hurt her ponies. (Keep in mind although you have to send someone over they do not have to be 'suffering' to be chosen and in fact you can simply send someone over to bring the wonders of human engineering over to the ponies. THINK CAREFULLY a lot can go wrong )

Gary Busey

I don't know. One human, out of thousands. I can't... subject... countless millions to such pain and suffering over one man. One human, one PERSON... no, she must help them all. She must save them all from pain and suffering, if it is within her power to do so.

I'm not going to send anyone because I don't want 1 Human out of Billions to be happy while the rest suffer she would have to help us all.

763661

Help everyone or don't help at all.

Serious:
Put the god in contact with the Make A Wish foundation. One terminally ill kid gets full healing and gets a proper briefing on the trials and tribulations as well as screening for fakers.
Actually:
Considering most gods of mythology are assholes and untrustworthy, i.e., bastards, if the person has to be alive now, I'll either suggest Lady Gaga or Justin Bieber, or the current Chair of the Federal Reserve.
If it can be a historical figure I'd have it be Lincoln just before J.W. Boothe shot him, or Vlad Lenin before he arrived in Russia.

Hmmm... well, there are plenty out there who would benefit from the special treatment. Perhaps a random child from the Make a Wish Foundation. Perhaps a starving orphan from Africa.

I think the most important priority in the decision process would be to make sure to send someone who wants to go for good. It should be something done out of conscious choice... so she'd have to also ask the person getting sent if they want to make the permanent transfer.

Certainly I would never choose to go myself if it meant I couldn't return. I like it here. I imagine many others feel as I do, as well.

Perhaps it might be better to send someone who might have a chance at discovering a way of making a permanent portal. A brilliant mind who could forge a link between two species who have much to offer each other.

In any case, I don't personally know anyone like either of those descriptions... so I'd have to give her parameters to follow. And, once again, the very first one I would give is to explain to the person chosen what going to Equestria would mean in no uncertain terms and then ask if they want to go.

Send a disaffected suburban punk, or maybe a starving Ethiopian child? How about a sweatshop worker, or a Pacific tribal? Charley Manson, Paul Simon, Adam Sandler, who even cares at this point? I think Tommy Ramone is still alive, why not send him?

What sort of omnipotent deity only saves one person and leaves the rest to suffer? The Entity Formerly Known As God called, he wants his job back.

Unless I come across someone I can ACTUALLY emphasize with, then I would probably be a poor choice in being the one to select someone to send over. I simply don't have that much of a social circle to begin with. Plus, I don't trust myself to actually avoid my own bias. There are too many factors and circumstances that complicate the issue to make picking easy. And what if something else develops down the line.

I'd say:

How would I have the right to proclaim the suffering of one to be superior to that of others'?

Assuming I'd have to choose someone for whatever reason, I'd send someone who 1.) actually wants to go to Equestria and 2.) has enough knowledge of humanity's science and culture to be a good representative of our species and can potentially better the quality of life for Equestrians. It's impossible to objectively weigh someone's suffering against that of others, so I'm not even going to try there.

If it were purely a matter of picking someone living or dead to be a good ambassador of humanity, I'd pick Carl Sagan. He'd love exploring their magic and would be an amazing communicator of our science and history.

Nicolas Cage is the only answer

It's a pity the subject has to be human. The person I'm thinking of needs a trip to Equestria more than anybody else.

Satan/God, depending on your interpretation of events.

Who else would need a stay in Equestria more than the most damned entity, or the greatest murderer in history? Assuming the Godesses could keep them under control ala Discord, they'd need it the most.

I reject her offer. Sending someone over there, away from everything they know and love would be the ultimate form of cruelty. That, and I mean, how many times can you physically reject a God's offer in your lifetime? That'd be something awesome to have on the ol' bucket list.

It would be a hard choice, but if given the utmost opportunity, there are many foundations that present children in need who would direly need to go to Equestria, just to see that life isn't as bleak as it is here. Now, if I had to choose an adult, I would most likely present the Wounded Warriors foundation to the deity. Those men have been through hell and back, coming home to broken families with PTSD and almost no job offers... Those men, who served their country with the utmost respect and bravery possible, would definitely be a good choice for Equestria. They represent the Bravery, the Honor, and our ability to protect not only ourselves, but others and their ideals, so that not just one person may die, but that they die to uphold millions.

Who am I to decide whose suffering is the greatest?

If you wish to only help a single being, then that is the most illogical thing to do when there are countless others suffering. If you have the power to help so many others, why not do so?

And some of the previous comments before have stated that "Why not send God/satan" or some other things bashing religion.

I think I'll play devils advocate with this, and say that just because the church says they did something in gods name, that doesn't mean that it is gods will. There's a reason humanity was given free will. They made their choice, and they had to live with the consequences.

The way I see it, the ones who caused so much death in gods name were talking to themselves, not god.

I myself am a catholic, but I feel that the only reason church exists is to keep us in the dark ages. I have no problem with it, but it shouldn't be a deciding factor in anyones lives.

Now I wouldn't be able to live with myself if I had to pick one person out of millions of people that has suffered from lack of food, shelter, sickness, or anything else.

We are human. Alone, we are no ones judge, jury, or executioner. We can not condemn a single person without first going every single fact, and we can not praise others when they do not deserve it.

If I get thumbs down, that's perfectly fine with me.

763849
This.

Nikola Telsa, he could improve their world and would be free from Thomas Edison, I also bet he could take his pigeon with him

763871

but I feel that the only reason church exists is to keep us in the dark ages.

How do you figure? The church is what brought us out of the dark ages, back in the day.

763906

Well, there were the trials of Galileo that stands out to me. There are just instances that the church tried with everything they could to halt scientific progress.

It was their fear of loosing power over the people that, to me, makes me think that way.

I'd tell her to go F*** herself.

She's really assuming a lot of things.

1. That she has the right to put all the responsibility and guilt on one person that she's selected at random. Someone that did not ask for this job.

2. That suffering can not only be quantified and measured, but can be compared to others to determine who is worst off.

3. That whoever she FORCES to Equestria would even want to go in the first place. That Equestria is their idea of paradise, instead of a living hell where no other humans live. Only beings the person cannot relate to at all.

Celestia really is a troll.

If I can't go NOBODY ELSE WILL! MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAH

She cannot take you along with her, she apologises but there is something preventing you from stepping inside the portal despite your best attempts

Zork.

I don't know why you people are saying "all or none" I mean, making individuals happy and not thinking of the rest is just nature. When a wolf kills a doe to help feed the pups or the rest of the pack, it doesn't think of the foals. When we hunt, we don't think of the kids. We aren't bastards, that is just nature and survival.

And for the question, if Luna takes credit then I guess I won't send a sociopath... I'll just send over a friend (who is a dick)

763649
I agree with 763915, 763871, 763849, 763695, 763662, 763661, and 764196.
To choose one person to go to an alien world reputed to be a paradise?

...No, I can't make that decision, nor do I have any right to do so; the decision lies with the person who would be sent to her world, not with me.

Furthermore, how can I choose just one person among the many hundred millions suffering equally? Any attempt I could make to decide who was "most worthy" would be the same as assigning arbitrary value to human lives—sophistical travesty at best and gross injustice at worst.

To give her advice on who to send based off of specific traits?

...To be honest, if she couldn't figure something like that out using her own judgment, she must not understand the nature of "suffering".

And really, just because a person is suffering doesn't mean they would appreciate being whisked away to another world, especially if they were the only one allowed to go. Just because they're suffering doesn't mean they don't have family and friends who are also suffering. On that note, it would probably be best to pick someone who does not have ties to other people, culture, or places, as they would be less likely to miss their old home.

This entire scenario would be shamefully unfair to multiple parties and I would not wish to be involved with it. I think that I would completely disregard the original premise and instead urge Celestia to try to find a better way of helping. Hell, since she can apparently travel to our world (unless this is arbitrarily a one-time deal, in which case shame on you OP for using that arbitrary contrivance), maybe she could help us improve the state of our world somehow rather than just taking people away from it. Because I'd much prefer to advocate that she focus her efforts in development of long-term solutions rather than resorting to what is essentially a short-term escape, since the former offers the promise of an actual solution at least, while the latter merely avoids dealing the problem altogether.

...And for those of you out there who are pro-TCB, I consider Ponification a short-term escape, since it doesn't actually solve problems so much as it removes the need to deal with the problems at all. After all, there is no need to solve the problems pollution or fuel shortage when an expanding magical barrier inexplicably destroys all human technology and undoes the alterations caused to the world by humans (such as structures, landscaping, pollution, etc.), is there? So, Ponification is an example of problem escaping, not problem solving.

763649 the people who are suffering are the one who should have a choice, not me, who am I to decide what they deserve?

Leroy Jenkins

No one.

763679
I'd give you a push through the portal. What are pals for?

763678 why not just send Carl Marx before he wrote that damn book

Send Hitler.

If I can't go, no one deserves to be happy.

765328 that works to

763871

If I get thumbs down, that's perfectly fine with me.

No way man, you get all of the thumb ups.

763649

You are approached one day by a familiar looking god,

The goddess

Who are we talking about here? Is it male or female? Both? And what mythology are they from?
I assume you aren't talking about anyone from MLP:FiM, because I don't recall any gods or goddesses being mentioned on the show...

Eh, let's pretend you picked a certain Princess instead. In that case:
765328
I picked Hitler as well (assuming we can send people from the past), but for different reasons.

We send Hitler, we avoid the Holocaust, possibly WWII...

Of course, then Red Alert happens, so...

Seriously though, I would take the opportunity to send someone who "deserves" it in the negative way. Someone who's removal from our world would benefit mankind the most. Alleviate one person's suffering or that of millions or billions? Not even a choice.

And if she decides to punish me for abusing her offer in that way, then so be it. That's a sacrifice I would be willing to make. And really, I would DESERVE to be brought to justice for what I did (i.e. kidnapping someone and dumping them into an entirely different world).

If I DID have to pick one person for the purpose of saving them from their suffering, I would ask their permission first. Even if you have the best of intentions, if you choose someone without asking their permission you are basically kidnapping them.

Finally, what is Celestia/Luna doing asking some random stranger on the street? She has no idea what the hell she is doing, does she? Also, I take it from the first sentence that she was spying on people's dreams? We aren't her subjects, she has no right to be doing that. It is an incredible invasion of privacy. Seriously, what the hell?

765312
Marx? Why not Lenin or Stalin? Marx just wrote about and was a proponent of an idealistic (though in my opinion ultimately unattainable and in many ways undesirable) social order. It was individuals like Lenin and Stalin that created the reviled "Communism" that we know today.

765790 because he wrote the book that inspired them with out it they MIGHT not have ever gained power.

765838
...No. That's... that's now how it works. You can't blame/punish someone for the actions of someone else. If you blame Marx for the actions of Stalin and Lenin, then you can blame all the philosophers and politicians who inspired Marx, and those who inspired them ad infinitum.

It'd be like blaming the Academy of Fine Arts Vienna for the Holocaust, since if they hadn't refused Hitler admittance he might have become a painter instead of a dictator.

765848 nonono you misunderstand the book he wrote was what inspired Stalin/Lenin/communistic dictators name her my goal is not punish but remove the possibility of him writing said book. Ie stop the idea before it starts.

Edit: He most likely meant well and thought the world would be better. But he failed to understand human nature and so true evil took his idea and twisted it to there needs in a sense the very thing he was against he accidently inspired.

send over know one

765864

But he failed to understand human nature and so true evil took his idea and twisted it to there needs in a sense the very thing he was against he accidently inspired.

Sure. But why should he be blamed/punished/removed for that?

If you remove the ones who are, you know, actually responsible for the actions in question you achieve the same thing without unjustly punishing someone who had no direct connection to said actions.

765883 765864
Simple principle, if you where to justify removing someone based on their future actions you have not only brought the Equestrians a dedicated writer bent on publishing a book that brought massive social uprisings to multiple countries you have given them a paradox in a box with the a card saying regards from humanity consult, Doctor if problems persist

Secondly there is a rule saying leave the sociopath (and tyrants) behind, admittedly there is no foreseeable win scenario and sending out criminals or people who STRIVE(D) to bring their own versions of peace and prosperity to their respective nations just to alter the time line here is in breach of the fourth rule for means of safety, for their sake and yours. For example, if you devote yourself on a near fanatical level to changing the world you live in then suddenly find yourself torn away from, it honestly how long will you last knowing that you have failed.

And apologies in regards to the deity references, it was a lot quicker to write god and goddess than medieval-enthusiast-with-supreme-power-over-planetary-bodies-who-happens-to-be-socially-inept (known aliases ranging from Woona, Moon pone, Nightmare Moon and lulu )

764172
There is too much that can go wrong to make a reasonable decision isn't there.

A person on their last breath in a dark hospital room with no family, friends, or even kind strangers to witness their passing suddenly vanishing and ending up in a world so different than what haven should look like would be damaging to said individual. And not to mention the perfect person to send across may not even exist in the first place, the globe could be searched thousands of times until time ran out and then no choice existed at all save picking someone at random in the rush.

And on the subject of human progress; what might happen if the mankind most known inventions passed over. Equestria looks entirely dependant on magic for life in general so what would happen if you suddenly taught them mass production principles or better yet pest control to poison the giant hydras that keep appearing on their lawns. Any interaction would cause mass change and somehow some way somepony or person will get screwed over, and that isn't even touching the the bad topics yet.

Say mr or ms X starts talking about what humans do/did to solve their war problem. Teaching tribals the power in the brass casings would be bad, but even suggesting the potential in the common U-235 atom?

766144

Teaching tribals the power in the brass casings would be bad, but even suggesting the potential in the common U-235 atom?

Obviously, nuclear fission is so simple that even the least technologically-advanced population of the poorest developing nations could figure out how to create fissile material for use in power plants and nuclear weapons production with only the slightest hint as to its potential.

...Because it's not as though only 30 countries out of the total 206 sovereign states in the world (~14.5%) currently possess operating nuclear power plants (Argentina, Armenia, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, India, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Netherlands, Pakistan, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and United States of America). It's not as though all of them belong to countries currently in the United Nations. Nor is it as though out of the 433 nuclear plants operating, the United States of America own 104 (~24%); nuclear member states of the European Union (Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and United Kingdom) own 132 (~30.5%); China, India, and South Korea own 58 (~13.4%); Russia and Ukraine own 48 (~11.1%); while Canada and Switzerland own 22 (~5%).

And it's not as though only 9 countries out of the total 206 sovereign states in the world (~4.4%) currently even possess any nuclear weapons (United States of America, Russia, France, China, United Kingdom, India, Pakistan, North Korea, and Israel). It's certainly not as though out of the ~17300 nuclear warheads owned by those countries, the United States of America own 7700 (~44.5%), Russia owns 8500 (~49.1%), France owns 300 (~1.7%), China owns 240 (~1.4%), the United Kingdom owns 225 (~1.3%), India owns 80-100 (~0.52%), Pakistan owns 90-110 (~0.58%), North Korea owns <10 (<0.06%), and Israel owns 80-200 (~0.81%).

Obviously, the above statistics are untrue, since nuclear fission is so easy to grasp that subsistence farmers with no educational background in any form of modern physics could figure out how it worked merely from an offhand remark on the potential of the "common" uranium-235 isotope (which has a natural abundance of 0.72%, compared to uranium-238's natural abundance of 99.284%).