|
Post by anodyne on Dec 16, 2005 22:01:50 GMT -5
It is irrational, sir. I have a reason to hate him. He committed the ultimate crime, which offends my sense of morality. You, on the other hand, refuse to give a reason. How is it personal? what is it based on? I assumed you hated him for the same reason I did but now I'm concerned. Or perhaps you realize that admitting you hate him because he offends your sense of what is good will mean I'm correct. Your normal average person understands that murder is wrong and therefore immoral. By accepting that it is you have to accept my argument. I don't have to say why I hate him, to prove the point that everybody isn't obligated to the same belief. Evasion You refuse to place your beliefs on trial. Lets see if they're rational or not. This debate could be interesting.. why end it?
|
|
|
Post by tonynatuzzi on Dec 16, 2005 22:08:01 GMT -5
Dukeofpain hates Tookie more for being Black than for being a murderer because if he did hate murderers than his idol wouldn't be Hitler.If Tookie was White than dukeofpain wouldn't even be judging his character since most White Nationalists cut White murderes some slack and turn a blind eye which explains why most White Nationalists see Adolf and Timoth Mcveigh as their heroes.
|
|
|
Post by dukeofpain on Dec 16, 2005 22:58:27 GMT -5
I don't have to say why I hate him, to prove the point that everybody isn't obligated to the same belief. Evasion You refuse to place your beliefs on trial. Lets see if they're rational or not. This debate could be interesting.. why end it? Uh.. OK. I hate him because I am empathetic to his victims. Alright? It doesn't matter, it's apart from the fact that it isn't inherent.
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Dec 16, 2005 23:23:50 GMT -5
What isn't inherent? Why do you believe the majority of the human population are disgusted by murder, and look with disgust at those who commit the ultimate crime?
You realize what he did was wrong. In fact, you're outraged by his actions. Hence, it's morally repulsive to you. This is a correct view of the situation considering murder, obviously, is the ultimate crime. It's the taking away of a person's right to their life.
So you agree it's an immoral act, and so does anyone else who isn't a defective. _________
Nice signature. Heh, you have an example of my arrogance? This is a clear cut example of perception being faulty.
|
|
|
Post by dukeofpain on Dec 16, 2005 23:44:11 GMT -5
What isn't inherent? Why do you believe the majority of the human population are disgusted by murder, and look with disgust at those who commit the ultimate crime? You realize what he did was wrong. In fact, you're outraged by his actions. Hence, it's morally repulsive to you. This is a correct view of the situation considering murder, obviously, is the ultimate crime. It's the taking away of a person's right to their life. So you agree it's an immoral act, and so does anyone else who isn't a defective. _________ Nice signature. Heh, you have an example of my arrogance? This is a clear cut example of perception being faulty. So? Do I speak for mankind?
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Dec 17, 2005 0:01:01 GMT -5
You speak for yourself. But your answer is a moral answer since, apparently, you understand that murder is not conducive to life, obviously. That the majority of the population undertsands this is a reason why I don't fear getting stabbed in the neck over an argument. That a minority act against people's right to life is simply a sign that they're morally defective. Or in other words, immoral.
|
|
|
Post by aroundtheworld on Dec 17, 2005 2:27:39 GMT -5
What other animals have you seen in the zoo today?
|
|
|
Post by dukeofpain on Dec 17, 2005 2:28:24 GMT -5
You speak for yourself. But your answer is a moral answer since, apparently, you understand that murder is not conducive to life, obviously. That the majority of the population undertsands this is a reason why I don't fear getting stabbed in the neck over an argument. That a minority act against people's right to life is simply a sign that they're morally defective. Or in other words, immoral. You're confused doll? Just relax
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Dec 17, 2005 2:39:59 GMT -5
Is that your rebuttal towards my belief that morality can be objective? Weak, doll.
I'm still waiting for you to put your beliefs on trial... wait... we're doing it now, or I should say I'm doing it. You're not participating.
|
|
|
Post by dukeofpain on Dec 17, 2005 2:58:55 GMT -5
Is that your rebuttal towards my belief that morality can be objective? Weak, doll. I'm still waiting for you to put your beliefs on trial... wait... we're doing it now, or I should say I'm doing it. You're not participating. Ease up now take a breather
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Dec 17, 2005 6:07:45 GMT -5
i still say the evidence against Tookie was never strong to begin with, especially since it came from jailhouse snitches from rival gangs
|
|
|
Post by Mike the Jedi on Dec 17, 2005 6:21:39 GMT -5
Well, it certainly didn't help that he was a member of a gang. Not exactly the Happy Sunshine Fun Brigade.
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Dec 17, 2005 6:32:54 GMT -5
Well, it certainly didn't help that he was a member of a gang. Not exactly the Happy Sunshine Fun Brigade. Thats doesn't make him guilty of the crime itself, you can't execute someone for being a gang member. The question was whether he did the crime or not.
|
|
|
Post by dukeofpain on Dec 17, 2005 18:47:33 GMT -5
Well, it certainly didn't help that he was a member of a gang. Not exactly the Happy Sunshine Fun Brigade. you can't execute someone for being a gang member. Why not?
|
|
|
Post by tonynatuzzi on Dec 17, 2005 19:09:14 GMT -5
The Crips are one of the lowest scums of American society.
|
|