xonodoubt69 wrote:DamascusSteel wrote:HAHAHA!!!
Awwwww.That makes me
Me too .. there's something horribly wrong with finding that funny

xonodoubt69 wrote:DamascusSteel wrote:HAHAHA!!!
Awwwww.That makes me
Narbus wrote:Are you honestly so stupid?
narbus wrote:Sit down and I will explain the concept of right and wrong, seeing how it you
have no concept of the issue outside of mindless regurgitation of lines from books that you obviously have decided to just believe blindly, rather than actually think about.
narbus wrote:Right and wrong are relative. This is not true and false. 2+2 does not equal 56, but killing a man to feed your starving family is not part of some great equation. Right and wrong are based on the values you place on things, and how you act around those values.
Narbus wrote:Slavery wasn't wrong, not to the South before the Civil War. They didn't see blacks as actual people, so treating them as slaves wasn't wrong. The North saw it differently, and happened to win the war.
Narbus wrote:Hitler knew he was right, so did the Allies, but only one side won the war. Or did you honestly think that every Nazi was sitting around discussing how very, very wrong they were, while continuing down the path they chose?
Narbus wrote:No. It was the stupid, outdated idea that there is such a thing as absolute morality that started the Holocaust, and perpetuated it, and is responsible for terrorism, prejudice, racial intolerance, and a slew of other things that you’ve been citing as “wrong.” Their ideas are different from yours, but they believe in them just as strongly, and it blinded them to actual thought just as much as it’s blinded you.
narbus wrote:Any idea or concept has two or more differing sides, there is no one thing that EVERYONE calls wrong. Some guy on the street who kills people for kicks doesn't see it as wrong. But seeing as how it's one versus everyone else, he's wrong only by society’s opinion, not some almighty rule from the sky.
narbus wrote:When you get your head out of your ass and realize that not everyone runs on the same rules you do, maybe you'll understand the world a little better. Or are you so incredibly stupid and arrogant as to believe that the whole world should be run according to only your half-assed, overly liberal ideas, in spite of the fact that they have absolutely no basis in reality?
Narbus wrote:I'll not bother bringing up the fact that I invited you to discuss this in another thread in something at least approaching a reasonable manner, but I do feel it necessary to point out there is nothing even approaching the most basic shreds of logic in your statement. The pathways that your brain must operate upon are so far removed from anything even faintly approaching "intelligence" that I don't even believe your earlier claim that you know how to operate something as basic as a book. How you have managed to operate a computer thus far to spew your insane, deluded ramblings across these forums is beyond me.
YourJesus wrote:how can you be so sure that it's all realitve - isn't that an absolute?
there are no absolutes! you said so yourself.[/b]
mans rights are inalienable. they cannot be taken away or suspended. they can be violated, but that does not change the fact that they exist.
once again : your perception of an action does not change the moral value of the action. there are rights and there are wrongs. if you value man's mind and man's life, then you must admit this.
according to you, hitler was in the right. if you say he was morally wrong to do what he did, then you are contradicting yourself and voiding your entire argument. which is it?
people like you are dangerous because by refusing to accept reality as an absolute you believe it is ok for you to form your own reality based on your perceptions. this leads to you taking action, ie murder, because in your own reality it's ok. it also leaves you feeling persecuted when people expect you to pay the concequences of your actions.
[b]just based on this argument, a person could say you're more likely then i am to commit murder because you believe given a set of circumstances you would be in the right, whereas I would never ever iniate force against another human being as i know it to be morally unpermisable.
xchrisx wrote:
no, right and wrong follow along the pathway of the best interests of the survival of a species. humans are born with the instincts to follow the non agression prinicple. there is no such thing as "relative" moral values, idiot.[/b]
example. you believe that the terrorist attacks on the united states, which killed about 3000 innocent americans were wrong.
you do not believe that the terrorist attacks - er, sorry, military strikes - on afghanistan, which killed about 3000 innocent afghani people were wrong.
but these are the same thing. murder is a murder. in the eyes of a murderer, what they are doint is not wrong. does that mean we should let them go?
if you really believe that morality is a product of society, then you're saying that if tomorrow, the us voted in a president who declared that anyone who wasn't a straight while male or female should be killed, and the majority of people felt this way, not only would it be ok, but it would be MORALLY RIGHT.
it is you, by your own admission, who cannot think for yourself. if rights and morals are a product of society, then you're just sitting around waiting for the majority to tell you what's right or wrong. congratulations, sheeple. have you any wool?
a. the civil war was fought to keep the south from secceding.
b. well. that was rascist. perception of a black person being inferior to a white person doesn't make it so.
some of them were. have you ever seen "schindlers list"?
what the hell are you talking about? according to your concept of "relative" morality, hilter was RIGHT. according to mine, hitler was WRONG. just for the record, hitler WAS wrong.
well, then you sit around on your ass and wait for "society" to tell you what to do next. because that's logical, you fucking asshole.
horseshit. you have not even attempted to point out a hole in my flawless logic, because THERE ARE NONE. for you, a person who thinks it's "very logical" to say that there is no morality, to tell me i don't understand logic is perposterous.
Emily wrote:I don't see how she could actually kick a baby and someone tape it?