Gothic.net News Horror Gothic Lifestyle Fiction Movies Books and Literature Dark TV VIP Horror Professionals Professional Writing Tips Links Gothic Forum




Go Back   Gothic.net Community > Boards > Politics

Politics "Under democracy, one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule -and both commonly succeed, and are right." -H.L. Menken

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-30-2005, 03:16 PM   #101
Granny-like_the_apple
 
Granny-like_the_apple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loy
Granny-just a clarification, Catholics (well, actually a minority of them. Sadly enough, it's the minority in charge....hey, just like this country) see the prevention of life being created as a sin LIKEN to, but not equal to, murder. It goes into the Magdalene cult and their beliefs, along with the idea of "fruitful and mulitply" that all the desert religions have.
Yeah, I know that's what some believe, but I think it's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard, and was saying so. If every sperm is sacred, why did god give men so fucking many?
__________________
When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him.

Don't let mobile phone conversations lead to premature sex and pregnancy.
Granny-like_the_apple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 04:00 PM   #102
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
Loy - we are on the same page pretty much, but I still believe morals are solid. Yes, interpretation may very on justification, but like you said about soldiers - killing is killing. How society reacts and deals is not morals, tis more what I would call ethics or at best just POV or perception.

Granny - evil is subjective. Ol' gw says everyone he invades is evil. He says people who support opposing forms of government are evil. Hell, he even talked about an axis of evil (the SNL parody of that which I have in MPG is nothing but hilarious BTW). Lets not say evil, because evil means a lack of good. As you yourself noted sometimes murder is justified, so techincally even by evil/good standards murder in some cases wouldn't be evil. Still wrong, just not evil.
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 07:56 PM   #103
Granny-like_the_apple
 
Granny-like_the_apple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by CptSternn
Granny - evil is subjective. Ol' gw says everyone he invades is evil. He says people who support opposing forms of government are evil. Hell, he even talked about an axis of evil (the SNL parody of that which I have in MPG is nothing but hilarious BTW). Lets not say evil, because evil means a lack of good. As you yourself noted sometimes murder is justified, so techincally even by evil/good standards murder in some cases wouldn't be evil. Still wrong, just not evil.
First off, Bush doesn't say that.

Second of all, that has absofuckinglutely nothing to do with this.

Third, I didn't use the word evil in my post to you, so I don't know why you're going off on that.

Fourth, well, see my last point. I was, and still am, objecting to your use of the words "wrong" and "sin" to describe my being a fucking ninja and killing ten dickwads before they BLOW UP THE ENTIRE WORLD, THEMSELVES INCLUDED. You said there's no moral gray area there. How the hell do you not see a gray area there, and how the hell can you say that it's still wrong to kill them?

Lastly, just FYI, you did not understand the point of my post to Asurai, so there was less than zero need for you to respond to it. On the other hand, there is some need for you to respond to the posts that are directed to you, so if you would be so kind...
__________________
When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him.

Don't let mobile phone conversations lead to premature sex and pregnancy.
Granny-like_the_apple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 07:59 PM   #104
MrMaelstrom
 
MrMaelstrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 1,608
Granny, did you fall off your rocking chair?

I dramatize and exagerate a lot, but that example about the nukes was more hilarious than funny.

Asurai: many things you say (about the military, for example) are quite true, but on paper only. Reality doesn't work that way. I wish it did, I really do, but like E_E pointed out to me, these fall under the label of "SHOULD" and not "IS".

A soldier should never question his orders (hence a chain of command).
You gave the example of a soldier being asked to shoot innocent civilians and (rightfully) refusing to carry them out.
How does that soldier know those people to really be innocent civilians?
His superior officers might have intelligence that says otherwise. If every soldier questions his orders, then the chain of command and any semblance of methodology is lost and nothing gets done.
The military way is "I say jump and you say how high", or to quote Monty Python: the beauty of military life = no questions, only orders.
Even with an example so SEEMINGLY blatant as yours.

Before any of you guys try to bite me in the arse, lemme say I have no qualm with soldiers and bomber pilots carrying out orders.
I do have a HUGE problem with those orders (especially when time and time again intelligence does not live up to its name - which happens far too often for me to perceive it as pure incompetence).

I also wish things were simple enough to be black and white, but whishing it does not make it so, and refusing to admit to it will undoubtedly hurt you a lot in the future.
It's like the snake that eats it's tail.
You refuse to accept something in order to protect yourself, but that attitute is leading you towards pain, as no man is an island (and I'm sure you know where I'm going with this).

Like when someone we love dies, stops loving us or prevents us from loving them: Denial is just postponing the pain. It will come, and with high interest rates (I know).
How's your love life anyway? I hope it's good, 'cause that's the only excuse I find for your absence around here.
The flames have been so high around here that hell must feel air-conditioned by comparison.
__________________
Undead again...
MrMaelstrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 08:23 PM   #105
MrMaelstrom
 
MrMaelstrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 1,608
Granny's right Sternn, Bush never said that. He is a dumbass, but you're probably thinking of Leslie Nielsen in Naked Gun.

I mean, his biggest ally is a friguin monarchy (UK). Spain is a democracy. Portugal's a democratic republic. Saudi Arabia is a monarchy. Russia is a.... .... ...fucking mess? :shock:

Let us not get carried away, or credibility is lost. One wrong phrase undoes 10 good ones. Not fair, but you know that's how it works.
__________________
Undead again...
MrMaelstrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 09:24 PM   #106
Granny-like_the_apple
 
Granny-like_the_apple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMaelstrom
Granny, did you fall off your rocking chair?
Rocking chairs are for pussies. I fell off a Harley.

And if you want a more serious example of moral ambiguity in murder, how about a true one? A baseball player has his mind controlled by a former building contractor, and is forced to kill the Queen of England. What's his responsibility?

What, wasn't that a documentary?


Sidenote: Bush may not be a good president, but he's one hot piece of ass.


Mmmmm MMM.
__________________
When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him.

Don't let mobile phone conversations lead to premature sex and pregnancy.
Granny-like_the_apple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 09:57 PM   #107
MrMaelstrom
 
MrMaelstrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 1,608
__________________
Undead again...
MrMaelstrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 10:10 PM   #108
MrMaelstrom
 
MrMaelstrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 1,608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Granny-like_the_apple
Rocking chairs are for pussies. I fell off a Harley.
I hope you have a Softail, then.
Wait, you're a Granny, so you must have a Heritage Softail
I like Fatboys myself :shock:
I just had to. In reality, I love Sportsters, because I'm small (vertically, 'cause I'm a giant when placed horizontaly :twisted: ). You may henceforth address me as Mr. Biggus Dickus.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Granny-like_the_apple
Sidenote: Bush may not be a good president, but he's one hot piece of ass.
"-That hurts. Sure, not as much as jumping on a bicycle without a seat, but it still hurts."
__________________
Undead again...
MrMaelstrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 10:43 PM   #109
Granny-like_the_apple
 
Granny-like_the_apple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMaelstrom
Quote:
Originally Posted by Granny-like_the_apple
Sidenote: Bush may not be a good president, but he's one hot piece of ass.
"-That hurts. Sure, not as much as jumping on a bicycle without a seat, but it still hurts."
Look, Mr. Biggus Dickus, all I'm saying is that I wouldn't mind sexually assaulting him with a concrete dildo. Is that so wrong? I didn't think so.

S-E-X-Y!
__________________
When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him.

Don't let mobile phone conversations lead to premature sex and pregnancy.
Granny-like_the_apple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 11:24 PM   #110
MrMaelstrom
 
MrMaelstrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 1,608
I'd like to stick a concrete dildo up dubya's arse as well. Maybe not for the same reasons though.

Well done on your voting choice Tman. I also believe Heinz to be the only tomato sauce worth being called ketchup!

What?
__________________
Undead again...
MrMaelstrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 11:43 PM   #111
Granny-like_the_apple
 
Granny-like_the_apple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMaelstrom
Well done on your voting choice Tman. I also believe Heinz to be the only tomato sauce worth being called ketchup!
My mom once sent me to the grocery store with the instructions to get "any ketchup but Heinz."

What a silly Republican.
__________________
When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him.

Don't let mobile phone conversations lead to premature sex and pregnancy.
Granny-like_the_apple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2005, 06:39 PM   #112
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
Granny, and I quote...

There was no moral ambiguity in the first place, according to your other statements. Killing somebody is evil. End of story. Doesn't matter if they're attacking you, or about to kill other people-taking another human life is evil.

Tis where the evil thing you did say came from. Not trying to draw other outside factors into this, just making the reference that 'evil doers' and various other forms of the word is a popular thing with a current politco. Just stating evil is a subjective term.

Oh, and I used to ride a '97 Springer Softail, but Harley are not popular in Ireland. Tis why I'm back to rice rockets.

Slán
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2005, 07:21 PM   #113
Granny-like_the_apple
 
Granny-like_the_apple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 517
Sternn, and I quote...

Quote:
There was no moral ambiguity in the first place, according to your other statements.
Apparently you are unfamiliar with the debating technique of taking on one part of a person's argument to reveal what you see as hypocrisy in another part of his argument. Either that or you simply have a low reading comprehension level. Judging from the body of your posts that I have read, I would say that both are quite possible.

In simpler terms: I was not saying that all killing is evil. That directly contradicts what I was saying to you. I saw Asurai as making that argument, and then making excuses for some kind of killing. I saw that as hypocritical. I was trying to point that out.

Now that that's cleared up, please respond to what I asked you in my previous posts. The on-topic ones. Way back.
__________________
When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him.

Don't let mobile phone conversations lead to premature sex and pregnancy.
Granny-like_the_apple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2005, 11:55 PM   #114
Asurai
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Granny-like_the_apple
There was no moral ambiguity in the first place, according to your other statements. Killing somebody is evil. End of story. Doesn't matter if they're attacking you, or about to kill other people-taking another human life is evil.
I think that you have me confused with someone else.

I've never made the argument that killing is always evil under all circumstances. Never. Not once in my entire life.

Quite the contrary, I believe that there are numerous cases when killing can be morally mandatory, where not killing would be evil.

Edit: I think that I know from where you got the assumption that I believe that killing is always evil, 'end of story.' I state that murder is always evil, permissable under no circumstances -- 'murder' and 'killing' are two very different things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loy
1-No, the job of a soldier is to kill/hurt whoever they're told to, and not to question those orders. "Defending the country" is the line used to justify their actions to civilians who don't wanna/can't quite seem to wrap their heads around the notion that these guys do happen to kill blah blah hegemony of imperialism blah blah
The job of the individual soldier is to follow orders. The job of the military as a whole is to defend the country.

Don't mistake the cause for the effect. The job of the military is to defend the country, period. Killing is simply the method by which it is done.

"The military is the strong arm of the hegemony." Damn those evil American imperialists! They're so evil, expanding their hegemony all the time against the poor, innocent Nazis. They had no right to attack the sovereign nation of Japan that would have never hurt a fly! Bush is a dictator! Support Saddam, Castro, Khomeini, and Gadhafi against... uh... dictators...

Quote:
2-You rebel against the notion of morality being fluid. Can I ask why, or is it because admitting the fluidity of morality/ethics admits that any stance one makes could be easilly disproven/disagreed with by a different set of circumstances
Because it makes justice impossible and, if taken far enough, leads to the eventual break up of civilization as a whole.

If morality is non-absolute, then having objective definitions and measures of justice are impossible. What's wrong for one person would not necessarily be wrong for another. Without objective justice, courts of law would act entirely arbitrarily, deciding issues and issuing sentences on nothing but whim of the moment -- or pardoning every person who can justify his crimes well enough. "You see, your honor, gang-****** girls is a right of passage in my culture... you'd be racist if you punished me for it."

Note that I'm not exaggerating your position. One of your examples was actually that ****** children in ancient Greece was perfectly alright, since that's how things were done then.

Quote:
3-After reading your 'retort" of my "soldier/gang' situation, and I'm seeing the type of whitewashing I spoke about earlier ("it's a military situation", "they're terrorists", and plenty more that are quite funny). Maybe you should actually read my example again, rather than cherry-picking from it in order to throw out a few cheap slurs alluding to a "treasonous streak" on my part (or, as I've said before, if you're gonna insult me, don't be a fucking pussy about it, just do it. Hell, I gave Bexxle a list of insults she could use. If you can find it, feel free to crib off of it). Sorry, no matter how verbose it is, I can spot bullshit and insulting a mile away.
Obviously not. Paranoid a bit about being insulted, eh?

I hadn't insulted you, nor alluded to some "treasonous streak," nor anything else of the sort. But if you like: you're a fucking traitor bitch. If the military is so evil, then why don't you go somewhere where they don't protect you? Maybe "Palestine." I've heard that they love infidels there, and you wouldn't have the burden of supporting the hegemony on your conscience.

Meanwhile, I wouldn't have to argue with someone who thinks that a military engagement and gang warfare are the same thing.

Quote:
4-Just an FYI, if a soldier is given an order, they have to carry it out, else face court-martial.
Face court-martial, yes. But there's about a chance in hell of being convicted. Believe it or not, Americans police our own. Lyndie England was recently sentenced to jail-time because the Army doesn't tolerate that kind of shit.

You've not even made an attempt of responding to my example, by the way.
Asurai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2005, 08:29 AM   #115
Granny-like_the_apple
 
Granny-like_the_apple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asurai
Edit: I think that I know from where you got the assumption that I believe that killing is always evil, 'end of story.' I state that murder is always evil, permissable under no circumstances -- 'murder' and 'killing' are two very different things.
Ok, sorry for the misunderstanding there. That's what I get for skimming. Killing is simply to take a life-the reasons for, and execution of, the killing, do not enter into it. Murder, on the other hand, is "to kill (a human being) unlawfully and with premeditated malice" (I hope we can agree on Webster's as a reliable dictionary). I'm certainly more open to the idea of that always being "evil" or however someone wants to define it, though I still wouldn't agree.

Now, I went back and found this quote from you: "But that's not what I meant by "morality is higher than government." I merely meant that government decree has no influence upon what is good and what is evil."

If government decrees have no influence on morality, and the definition of murder relies largely on its illegality, then you might want to revise your condemnation of murder as always being evil.
__________________
When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him.

Don't let mobile phone conversations lead to premature sex and pregnancy.
Granny-like_the_apple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2005, 09:24 AM   #116
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
Granny - I thought I addressed you question? Wasn't it something along the lines of my hypocrisy as my actions vs. what I say about morality?

I'll try to state it more clearly if I somehow wasn't prevously. I have killed, and chances are before my life is over, I'll kill again. Even though I may be able to justify it legally and ethically, doesn't make it right. It's always wrong. I however have a belief system within my own religion where I can recieve forgiveness.

That the question?

Slán
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2005, 11:03 AM   #117
Granny-like_the_apple
 
Granny-like_the_apple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by CptSternn
Granny - I thought I addressed you question? Wasn't it something along the lines of my hypocrisy as my actions vs. what I say about morality?

I'll try to state it more clearly if I somehow wasn't prevously. I have killed, and chances are before my life is over, I'll kill again. Even though I may be able to justify it legally and ethically, doesn't make it right. It's always wrong. I however have a belief system within my own religion where I can recieve forgiveness.

That the question?
That was part of it, but it was more of an aside than the real issue, which centered on the atomic bombs hypothetical. Simply telling me to turn the other cheek on a situation like that, where billions of people would die if I did so, is not addressing how you can see no gray area in the morality issues there.

Case 1: I kill ten people who are about to kill everyone on earth. Ten people die. (There is no way to stop them without killing them. My hypo, my rules.)

Case 2: I do not kill those ten people. They kill everyone on earth. Approximately 6.5 billion people die, those original ten people included.

Case 3: I buy a gun, go outside my house, and kill ten strangers.

If you think these examples are too extreme, too bad. No gray area means no gray area in any situation, no matter how extreme. But I will offer another thing to which you can respond instead. I'll just get to the heart of what I'm saying, which isn't as crazy as my hypos might make it seem: How can you see no gray areas in morality when one act of killing is to prevent much more killing, and another act of killing is simply to kill?
__________________
When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him.

Don't let mobile phone conversations lead to premature sex and pregnancy.
Granny-like_the_apple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2005, 03:36 PM   #118
Asurai
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Granny-like_the_apple
Murder, on the other hand, is "to kill (a human being) unlawfully and with premeditated malice" (I hope we can agree on Webster's as a reliable dictionary).
Correct, although I have a slight quibble with the word 'unlawfully' in that definition. It would imply that (to use the same example that I'm fond of) Germans' killing Jews wasn't murder, since it was legal in Germany at the time.

Quote:
Now, I went back and found this quote from you: "But that's not what I meant by 'morality is higher than government.' I merely meant that government decree has no influence upon what is good and what is evil."

If government decrees have no influence on morality, and the definition of murder relies largely on its illegality, then you might want to revise your condemnation of murder as always being evil.
Again, I point out that in Nazi Germany it was legal to kill Jews, but I think that everyone here would still call the act itself 'murder.'

In feudal Japan, a samurai had the authority to kill any peasant at any time for any reason, without fear of consequences -- but if a samurai went and decapitated a farmer for not bowing low enough, I'm sure that we would all consider that murder, even though it was legally allowed.

Or, to use a more PC example, most of the early American colonists saw nothing wrong with attacking Indians, and it was mostly legal, but I'm sure that we would, despite the legality, call it 'murder' if a group of settlers crept into a village, slaughtered a few children, and snuck away.

In Saddam's Iraq, it was perfectly "legal" (not that there was really such a thing as law there) for Saddam and his sons to crash a wedding, kill the groom, and **** the bride.

My point is, that if the government tomorrow said that I could go out and torture/kill any Muslims without fear of consequences, I would still be evil for torturing and a murderer for killing. Governmental permission or decree has no bearing upon what is good or evil.
Asurai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2005, 04:00 PM   #119
Asurai
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 324
Granny, they weren't addressed to me, but I hope that you don't mind if I answer your situations nonetheless.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Granny-like_the_apple
Case 1: I kill ten people who are about to kill everyone on earth. Ten people die.
Your position would be perfectly justified; you're killing criminals and murderers for the sake of protecting innocent lives. Self-defense also is to be considered in this case. I'd recommend you for a medal of commendation.

Quote:
Case 2: I do not kill those ten people. They kill everyone on earth. Approximately 6.5 billion people die, those original ten people included.
Now you're getting into whether pre-emptive action is morally mandatory. It depends, I suppose, on whether you 100% knew that those people, if not killed, would commit massive genocide. If you were aware, then I would say that you're nearly as much to blame as the ten, and no excuse would remain to you. You could argue that it's immoral to kill, no matter the reason -- in which case you sacrificed your own life and the lives of billions of others to the murderers: you sacrificed good to evil for the sake of neutrality, a perverse compromise between life and death, and for that alone you are to be condemned. You could argue that you were afraid to do anything -- in which case anyone with half a brain would point out that you would have died if you had done nothing. And, of course, those ten would die either way, so you might as well save the other billions of people.

If you were unaware, then you, of course, cannot be condemned for failing to be omniscient.

Quote:
Case 3: I buy a gun, go outside my house, and kill ten strangers.
You're a murderer. In the other examples, you specifically targeted people whom, if you did not kill, would kill you and everyone else. This time, you simply killed ten people at random without any specific purpose, and I would gladly flip the switch on you myself -- not that you would deserve such a (relatively) painless escape.
Asurai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2005, 04:36 PM   #120
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
Granny - they ALL are morally wrong. Doesn't mean you shouldn't do it. Sex, drugs, alcohol abuse, and all that shizzle is immoral, but ye still do it. No one is perfect, just gotta know how to be forgiven in your own religious teachings. If you don't believe in forgiveness, then your probably not the kinda person who really worries about morals anyhow.

Plus you ask what if killing 1 saves 100. Well then the problem comes in, who makes that decision. If killing my mother saves the lives of 100 strangers in some far off land I've never heard of, is that worth it to me and my family?

Is a fetus a life? If so is killing abortion doctors wrong? Is killing off government officials that support the death penalty?

I mean, here are lots of real grey areas like those. Depending on where you fall the line of ethics, not morality is where you judge this. There is black and white, but there also is the fact we aren't perfect and sometimes have to do what we have to do to make things just.

Slán
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2005, 07:14 PM   #121
Granny-like_the_apple
 
Granny-like_the_apple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asurai
Quote:
Originally Posted by Granny-like_the_apple
Murder, on the other hand, is "to kill (a human being) unlawfully and with premeditated malice" (I hope we can agree on Webster's as a reliable dictionary).
Correct, although I have a slight quibble with the word 'unlawfully' in that definition. It would imply that (to use the same example that I'm fond of) Germans' killing Jews wasn't murder, since it was legal in Germany at the time.
Unless it violated international laws, it wasn't murder, unless you want to redefine the word. I looked up the definition of murder in lots of different things, and everything included the word "unlawfully," and that's what I was pointing out. Murder is dependant on laws, and laws are mutable, while you believe morality is not. If you want to proffer a definition of murder that better fits with your belief in morals, be my guest.

Quote:
Again, I point out that in Nazi Germany it was legal to kill Jews, but I think that everyone here would still call the act itself 'murder.'

In feudal Japan, a samurai had the authority to kill any peasant at any time for any reason, without fear of consequences -- but if a samurai went and decapitated a farmer for not bowing low enough, I'm sure that we would all consider that murder, even though it was legally allowed.

Or, to use a more PC example, most of the early American colonists saw nothing wrong with attacking Indians, and it was mostly legal, but I'm sure that we would, despite the legality, call it 'murder' if a group of settlers crept into a village, slaughtered a few children, and snuck away.

In Saddam's Iraq, it was perfectly "legal" (not that there was really such a thing as law there) for Saddam and his sons to crash a wedding, kill the groom, and **** the bride.

My point is, that if the government tomorrow said that I could go out and torture/kill any Muslims without fear of consequences, I would still be evil for torturing and a murderer for killing.
Evil, fine, murderer, no. Technically. Which was my whole point.


I just watched an episode of South Park where Kyle's cousin visits. Awesome. "In this class, we need concentration. You need to concentrate and pay attention." "Maybe we should send him to concentration camp."

How I've missed this show.

And that's my way of saying that you don't need to worry about using PC examples with me.
__________________
When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him.

Don't let mobile phone conversations lead to premature sex and pregnancy.
Granny-like_the_apple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2005, 07:19 PM   #122
Granny-like_the_apple
 
Granny-like_the_apple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asurai
Granny, they weren't addressed to me, but I hope that you don't mind if I answer your situations nonetheless.
I don't mind, although I only set up that ridiculous example because of Sternn's ridiculous assertions. So in that vein, I hope you don't mind if I ignore your answers other than to say that I agree.
__________________
When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him.

Don't let mobile phone conversations lead to premature sex and pregnancy.
Granny-like_the_apple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2005, 07:33 PM   #123
Granny-like_the_apple
 
Granny-like_the_apple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by CptSternn
Granny - they ALL are morally wrong. Doesn't mean you shouldn't do it.
Something that is morally wrong is something that you shouldn't do. What's the fucking point of morals otherwise?

Quote:
If you don't believe in forgiveness, then your probably not the kinda person who really worries about morals anyhow.
Yeah, you're right, I don't believe in forgiveness. And I don't give a shit about morals, which is why I'm spending all this time arguing about morailty. What a dumb thing to say.

Quote:
Plus you ask what if killing 1 saves 100. Well then the problem comes in, who makes that decision. If killing my mother saves the lives of 100 strangers in some far off land I've never heard of, is that worth it to me and my family?
Actually, I said what if killing ten saves 6.5 billion, including your family. And the problem of who decides didn't factor into my example: I fucking decided. And I wasn't killing my mother. Although if she were one of those ten people, I would.

Quote:
Is a fetus a life? If so is killing abortion doctors wrong? Is killing off government officials that support the death penalty?

I mean, here are lots of real grey areas like those. Depending on where you fall the line of ethics, not morality is where you judge this. There is black and white, but there also is the fact we aren't perfect and sometimes have to do what we have to do to make things just.
Argh. I know there are gray areas. You're the one who said there weren't. How do you differentiate ethics from morality? And if something makes things "just," how can it be morally wrong?


"You can't just lock fifty people in your basement without food or water!"
"They aren't people, they're hippies!"
__________________
When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him.

Don't let mobile phone conversations lead to premature sex and pregnancy.
Granny-like_the_apple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2005, 07:58 PM   #124
MrMaelstrom
 
MrMaelstrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 1,608
I don't agree.

Some people aren't insane criminals.

Everyone can be deinstitutionslized and deprogrammed. I saw a documentary (french) where they took some former palestinian prisoners and israeli army and mossad agents with their wives and children to spend a month in Japan together, just like regular tourists do.

At 1st none spoke to the other (except for the kids calling eachother names and being swiftly be made to be quiet without screaming or hitting from either side).

The nips wouldn't let up, taking sightseing just about everywhere and seing just about everything. When broken apart, they'd split the men from women and adults from children.

They put a tv in a common room, but give the remote to one side and tv codes to the other side.

They'd give rackets to some kids and tennis or ping-pong balls to others. Eventually, all they were given was a football (soccer) and the condition to mix teams by ethnicity and gender. It worked.

The adults argued a lot at 1st, but when away from the men, who kept revising history, the women shared fear and grief, constant fear and constant grief.


Their last days were spent visiting as already a group of friends the temples of Kyoto, Mount Fuji...






and Hiroshima was left for last. Children were shown the city, but not all parts of the museum. When shown what happened to the city and its people, all cried. They had learned already to befriend an enemy and see his point of view, but never recognizing the futility of it all... ...untill then.

I believe one of them belongs to the Mazen clan.

They kept in touch.


Things and people can change. Everyone but mules can change their mind. Only the weak of mind and character can't.

People can't bring back the dead, but they can save the living.


The living and the unborn.
That's all you can do.
The dead are to be honored and loved inspite of their sins.
To avenge them is to make more dead to avenge.
The best way to avenge your dead is to keep their blood alive (yours).


Am I really that crazy? Does this only make sense to me?
__________________
Undead again...
MrMaelstrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2005, 08:18 PM   #125
Loy
 
Loy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Seattle
Posts: 408
Asurai-I love how you pull the "we beat the nazi's" as a "retort" against my assertion about the military. Especially when it was pointed out that 1-the nazi's were NOT the reason we went to war in the first place, 2-we had plenty of sympathisers/supporters of the Nazis (and Fascists) within our country before, during, and after the war, and 3-even after the war, while we did punish a few heads, when it came to punishing those who were the main impetus of the Nazi machinery, we didn't....in fact, we gave the Nazi intelligence network a free pass (part of the "Operation Paperclip", where we brought over the top Nazi scientists and intelligence officers, who then became involved in our arms race, our space race, and the creation of the Central Intelligence Agency) and faked "facts" to tribunerals in order to exonerate business leaders and industrialists. In other words, we gave a phto-op to make ourselves look good, whilst we were busy protecting those that were creating and living off of the "bad" situation.

However, as far as pushing the hegemon, we can speak about the Indian Wars, the Mexican-American war, the Spanish-American war, the anti-Bolshevik "police actions" (during and directly after the fall of the Tsar Dynasty), our whole history with pre-commie China, the central/south Pacific islands, our entrance into the two big wars (do you really believe those reasons as being altruistic, or are you just whitewashing them to "defend" our history?), our many involvements in the Middle East and Central/South America throughout this century (Panama's is a VERY interesting history of exploitation on the US part, but there's also Columbia, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Chile, Peru....well, to be honest, just name a country south of our border, and read the history), not to forget the whole Cuban debacle (which ended up blowing up in our face as much as the Iran thing did), Haiti, our travels into the African continent, all the way up to Grenada, Panama again, Bosnia-Herzegovena, and back to the Middle East with Iraq, and even beyond with our exploits in the Stan's. I could also speak about how our military troops were used to kill off American citizens who wanted such outrageous things as decent wages, livable cities, and equal rights throughout our history. (In fact, the main argument for raising taxes in the begining of our country was to raise a standing army. Why did we argue to raise an army. To put down anti-elite rebellions such as Shay's Rebellion. And what caused Shay's Rebellion? High Taxes that caused many farm closures.). Now, I could go into further detail, but I'd like to see how you're gonna twist this into "defending our country". C'mon, I'm waiting....

I also love how you're now speaking of pre-emptive actions as being morally justifiable. Maybe in your view of morality they could be, but I'm gonna go with a legal view here. Say somebody is threatening to harm me, and I kill him. Am I let go? Actually, I'd be charged with murder (killing somebody with malicious forethought), because no matter how many threats he makes towards me, I can't do shit unless he attacks me first. Something to chew on.

(as a clarification, it was actually illegal for citizens in Nazi Germany to kill jews.....harm, attack, slander, yes all these were accepted, but to kill was only allowed so by the state).

As far as why do I live here rather than someplace else? Simple, I am an American. Not by birth, but by cultural influence (which makes me, on a really basic sense, a bit more of an american than most who were born here, since I've had to learn the cultural history and system of this country, soak it in on my own, and after all of that, I still accept it). Does this mean that just because I'm an American I have to accept everything about this culture?

*steps away from the computer and cackles loudly*

You really AREN'T a history major, are you?

As far as defending me, let me make it as clear as possible to you....nobody "defends" me, I defend myself. Whilst I do see a need for cops and the military, those needs are more for others who really don't understand the meaning of freedom. See, as any sociologist will tell you, people, as a whole, need rules and regulations, not so much to protect them, but more as a way for self-identification. "I don't eat pork because I'm a muslim", "I don't celbrate Christmas because I'm Jewish"....there's plenty of other examples I could use. But the point is this-nothing differentiates Americans from anybody else in the world, throughout history, in any signifigant way except for the rules we have. As far as protection....I have never called a cop to settle a dispute, since I found it more constructive (and interesting) to speak with the other person. I've been beaten up, yes. I've been robbed, yes. I've had plenty of guns pointed at me. However, I've never called a cop. Why? Because in those instances, I just slipped a bit in the "protecting myself" part, and learned lessons for myself to use in the future. As far the military....remember, I grew up in a military family. I grew up in military towns. I have plenty of friends who are military. However, I don't expect them to "defend this country" because I know (and they know, ultimately) that that's not what they're supposed to do.

I could also throw this your way by saying "if you're so gung-ho about the role of our miltary, why the fuck don't you join?", but then I'd have to laugh. Either way, you'd only prove how truly ignorant your stance has been on this case.

And am I paranoid about being insulted? Don't really care about being insulted, I just have a problem people who can't come out and honestly speak their mind. It's a form of self-delusion (it reminds me of Vonnegut's little essay on Victorianism. If you've got the time, I'd suggest reading it. It's in "Palm Sunday") and self-delusion in any form is a block against honest communication. And whilst you may argue that you weren't "insulting" or "alluding to anything", you forget that being a half-breed has given me plenty of examples of this mode of communication to recognise it when I see/hear it.
In other words, I'm dragging you out of your little closet, Rove Jr.
__________________
I don't mean to sound bitter, cold, or cruel, but I am, so that's how it comes out.
Loy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
twilight crying goddess xxxQueenOfDarknessxx Literature 2 11-30-2010 08:58 AM
Deus Ex Daedalus TV, Movies, & Games 11 12-16-2007 04:27 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:09 PM.