Anyone mentioned animals yet? Killing animals (to eat them; so they don't annoy you (flies)) is fine, but killing humans isn't? I don't think so.
Choose one: Ask the next fly you see to leave your house and go to court if it refuses
OR
kill the next human who annoys you
unless you play the entwine cost of a good argument.
Oh good, the animal activist, this is what we needed, you know, with the religion, and everything else festering in this pit of a topic...
Animals, kill other animals, you think because humans do it it's wrong?
I'd love for you to be ripped to shreds by a bear, and still love animals.
And second your little "CHOOSE ONE!"
Makes NO sense at all, please, reiterate, I don't see what you're trying to say.
I'm saying there's no difference between a human and a fly, a bacterium or a tree. If you're fine with killing animals, you should be fine with killing humans.
The difference is, we cannot relate to a fly. Preservation of the human race is a natural instinct for most of us. Why do I kill a fly? It annoys me, and has no way of being useful to the human race. Why don't I kill a human even if it annoys me, and it has no chance of being useful to the human race? I can relate to the human. It looks similar, and is of the same species. I can have sympathy for it. I cannot have sympathy for a fly, it means nothing to me.
This being said, I could easily kill someone if it threatened my friends, family, or myself. I wish to preserve my life, and the lives of those I care about. The one that threatens that means less to me than mine or the others.
This is how I see it anyways.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's hard to follow your dreams when you run from your nightmares. --
Good lord, we have receded to **** flinging :tongue.gif:
I don't care what your shmanzy science journals say, nobody knows what comes before, or after death, so thier there is no point calling the other person an idiot becuase of their view.
Also, on a related note, i find this very interesting.
Tl;dr: There is another world/dimension/plain of existance where what is commonly known as are mind and/or soul resides, and our body is simply controlled by it.
People are afraid of death, they consider murder morally wrong, and I ask, why?
Just wanted to see what people think.
And please, no **** flinging.
In the past you weren't worth living if you could not contribute to society.
Today i think we place TOO MUCH sanctity on life. Some people deserve nothing more than death, yet they receive three hot meals a day and free shelter without ever having to contribute to society at all. I speak of serious criminals, murderers and rapists and the like who remain in prison doing nothing more than costing YOU THE TAXPAYER money.
As the human population currently stands the earth cannot naturally sustain itself. I think we need to institute population control to survive as a species. We need to face the facts, some people are not worth the resources they consume, until we realize that we will not be able to sustain ourselves. With technology getting better and better people live longer and longer and only reproduce more and more, it's a big **** snowball rolling down a bigger mountain and the edge is not that far off if we continue as we are without making some changes
I guess I veered off topic, more to the value of life......
Murder can be wrong, it can be right, it's all situational. 99% of the time it is wrong
My thoughts exactly. However, there's no erm... ACCEPTABLE difference.
I find it acceptable, because it is part of my instinct. Killing our own is bad for our species. Killing the fly, however, is not bad for our species.
I think the word you would be looking for is... actually... I have no idea. Acceptable is subjective, which varies person to person. This would have to be compared objectively, which I cannot think of the appropriate word for that sentence...
I'm too tired to think of words right now... >.>
I understand what you are trying to say. Killing a fly is still killing, and this is correct. The only difference is how much that life means, which is what makes the death mean something.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's hard to follow your dreams when you run from your nightmares. --
I would kill a cow and eat it, but I could never bring myself to killing a cat or dog. The cow does not mean anything to mean, and thus has no worth. The cat and dog mean something, because they are my companions and I care for them, so they are worth something to me. All 3 are animals, but their values are different to me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's hard to follow your dreams when you run from your nightmares. --
You keep saying they're important to YOU. I, however, am talking about if it's good for the universe.
Because it is in my opinion that what I say is right. It may differ from what you think is right.
As for the universe, I don't think it cares. It is not a being capable of thought, or caring what happens. Based on this, it wouldn't matter if we went into a nuclear holocaust. How is this one fly good for the universe? How am I good for the universe. If anything, all life is bad for the universe, as we steal the resources from the planet to use for ourselves. The planet being part of the universe, we are stealing from a small part of the universe. In this case, mass extinction of all life would be a good thing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's hard to follow your dreams when you run from your nightmares. --
Because murder is just wrong, in almost every way possible, because it just scares people, (for somepeople anyway) although, dying is something to be afraid of, its a fate you can't escape.
On-topic- its morally wrong for a couple of reasons i can't explain in English.
Look at it this way, if somebody killed the president, the nation is gonna get pissed right? You ending a life, a useful life, and I hear lifes are pretty hard to come by.
Because murder is just wrong, in almost every way possible, because it just scares people, (for somepeople anyway) although, dying is something to be afraid of, its a fate you can't escape.
On-topic- its morally wrong for a couple of reasons i can't explain in English.
Look at it this way, if somebody killed the president, the nation is gonna get pissed right? You ending a life, a useful life, and I hear lifes are pretty hard to come by.
Think about it THAT way.
they arent hard to come by at all, theres 7 billion at the moment. i can go have sex a few times without a condom, and there will be one more.
Say the family relied on that person.
There's a stay at home mom and the father must work to feed his three children. The oldest of the three, however, is pissed at his father's neglection toward him, so he must escape to the Internet for a further depth to his life outside of his harsh parents. That, however wasn't enough, so he had to leave home any chance he had and browse forums through his iPod at midnight on weekdays at a friend's house...
Anywho, if that man is taken away, the family is screwed. No one to watch the children and the mother is forced to work some low-paying job and leave the children home alone.
But that's what I think about. I'm not sure if people think that deeply into it as I do and put myself in the family's position.
Oh good, the animal activist, this is what we needed, you know, with the religion, and everything else festering in this pit of a topic...
Animals, kill other animals, you think because humans do it it's wrong?
I'd love for you to be ripped to shreds by a bear, and still love animals.
And second your little "CHOOSE ONE!"
Makes NO sense at all, please, reiterate, I don't see what you're trying to say.
The difference is, we cannot relate to a fly. Preservation of the human race is a natural instinct for most of us. Why do I kill a fly? It annoys me, and has no way of being useful to the human race. Why don't I kill a human even if it annoys me, and it has no chance of being useful to the human race? I can relate to the human. It looks similar, and is of the same species. I can have sympathy for it. I cannot have sympathy for a fly, it means nothing to me.
This being said, I could easily kill someone if it threatened my friends, family, or myself. I wish to preserve my life, and the lives of those I care about. The one that threatens that means less to me than mine or the others.
This is how I see it anyways.
It's hard to follow your dreams when you run from your nightmares. --
I don't care what your shmanzy science journals say, nobody knows what comes before, or after death, so thier there is no point calling the other person an idiot becuase of their view.
Also, on a related note, i find this very interesting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Forms
Tl;dr: There is another world/dimension/plain of existance where what is commonly known as are mind and/or soul resides, and our body is simply controlled by it.
In the past you weren't worth living if you could not contribute to society.
Today i think we place TOO MUCH sanctity on life. Some people deserve nothing more than death, yet they receive three hot meals a day and free shelter without ever having to contribute to society at all. I speak of serious criminals, murderers and rapists and the like who remain in prison doing nothing more than costing YOU THE TAXPAYER money.
As the human population currently stands the earth cannot naturally sustain itself. I think we need to institute population control to survive as a species. We need to face the facts, some people are not worth the resources they consume, until we realize that we will not be able to sustain ourselves. With technology getting better and better people live longer and longer and only reproduce more and more, it's a big **** snowball rolling down a bigger mountain and the edge is not that far off if we continue as we are without making some changes
I guess I veered off topic, more to the value of life......
Murder can be wrong, it can be right, it's all situational. 99% of the time it is wrong
I find it acceptable, because it is part of my instinct. Killing our own is bad for our species. Killing the fly, however, is not bad for our species.
I think the word you would be looking for is... actually... I have no idea. Acceptable is subjective, which varies person to person. This would have to be compared objectively, which I cannot think of the appropriate word for that sentence...
I'm too tired to think of words right now... >.>
I understand what you are trying to say. Killing a fly is still killing, and this is correct. The only difference is how much that life means, which is what makes the death mean something.
It's hard to follow your dreams when you run from your nightmares. --
I would kill a cow and eat it, but I could never bring myself to killing a cat or dog. The cow does not mean anything to mean, and thus has no worth. The cat and dog mean something, because they are my companions and I care for them, so they are worth something to me. All 3 are animals, but their values are different to me.
It's hard to follow your dreams when you run from your nightmares. --
The military are trained to take a persons life, but they are not bad. Please, explain more why it is bad.
It's hard to follow your dreams when you run from your nightmares. --
I was meaning from his point of view, but I accept my epic fail right there.
It's hard to follow your dreams when you run from your nightmares. --
Because it is in my opinion that what I say is right. It may differ from what you think is right.
As for the universe, I don't think it cares. It is not a being capable of thought, or caring what happens. Based on this, it wouldn't matter if we went into a nuclear holocaust. How is this one fly good for the universe? How am I good for the universe. If anything, all life is bad for the universe, as we steal the resources from the planet to use for ourselves. The planet being part of the universe, we are stealing from a small part of the universe. In this case, mass extinction of all life would be a good thing.
It's hard to follow your dreams when you run from your nightmares. --
It's hard to follow your dreams when you run from your nightmares. --
Nope, I'm not a smug asshole, i'm just a regular one.
:wink.gif:
Edit: I'm also a hypocrite, apperantly.
Actually, after reading your posts, you're just an ignorant kid.
On-topic- its morally wrong for a couple of reasons i can't explain in English.
Look at it this way, if somebody killed the president, the nation is gonna get pissed right? You ending a life, a useful life, and I hear lifes are pretty hard to come by.
Think about it THAT way.
they arent hard to come by at all, theres 7 billion at the moment. i can go have sex a few times without a condom, and there will be one more.
Say the family relied on that person.
There's a stay at home mom and the father must work to feed his three children. The oldest of the three, however, is pissed at his father's neglection toward him, so he must escape to the Internet for a further depth to his life outside of his harsh parents. That, however wasn't enough, so he had to leave home any chance he had and browse forums through his iPod at midnight on weekdays at a friend's house...
Anywho, if that man is taken away, the family is screwed. No one to watch the children and the mother is forced to work some low-paying job and leave the children home alone.
But that's what I think about. I'm not sure if people think that deeply into it as I do and put myself in the family's position.
/thread.