> > acts to cause unhappiness to others then what is there tha we can
> > actualy do to stop them?
>
> It is called the law. In this country, we are said to have the
> "inalienable rights" to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness,
> *in that order*. So, if one's right to pursue happiness impinges on
> another's, we have a conflict that needs to be resolved, and that may
> be hazy (civil court). If one's pursuit of happiness involves robbing
> another of their Liberty or Life, it is not hazy, unless their need
> for Happiness is due to violation of their Liberty or serious threats
> to their Life (criminal court, unless slavery is legal). So, the legal
> system must adjudicate when problems cannot be resolved, and proper
> action taken by society to correct the behavior of the individual.
Yes agreed but that is action afer the unlawfull event not action
prior to, in order to stop it happening.
> > I would say unless you are physcaly stronger and have the will to
> > physicaly stop them, then the answer is nothing at all. However as I
> > have said we must each bear the consqences of each of our acts or
> > words.
>
> And that may involve being ganged up upon by the world around you
> which you have so offended.
Indeed. But again not a bar to individual choice. If I make a man
unhappy and it is my choice to do so, then i must face the
conseqeunces of my actions, if that means a beating by the mans
brothers then that is what it means. Againg though this may indeed
act as a threat to stop my actions, or I might decide to say fuck it
and do what I want anyway and take the beating, either way I still
have a choice.
> > I have no power over the things others choose to do, but no I would
> > not like someone to cause me unhappiness, yet it still happens huh.
>
> It does if you let it. If someone tries to mug me, I resist will full
> force, for if I do not, and I make it easy for them to steal and
> abuse, then they will continue and make my world a worse place to
> live. It is my responsibility as a sentient being on this planet to
> enforce, on an individual if not collective basis, the imposition of
> justice upon those without their own morals. It's never too late for
> them to learn, and morals are learned, by some more naturally than
> others, but never without being taught.
Ohh no mate some things you simply have no control over, it is not
just a mugging that has the capacity to make you unhappy. How would
you feel for example if you son went out mugging and you found out
about it?
> > Indeed as you say all highly subjective, so let the ancient writers of
> > this declaration have their say. I would ask again though for you to
> > consider why it is that murder is generaly consideed evil?
>
> Because one has taken the most dear thing from another: Life.
Heh heh yes that is I guess the standard answer, my questions though
ugre you to think deeper. Why is life the most preciouse thing? If
death in and of itself is no big deal, I mean no great sin, then why
do you consider life in and of itself as great preciouse thing. What
is it about life that makes it so and so what is it about takeing a
life that is so bad?
> > Is it due to death? I can't see it, death being part of life, we kill
> > to live nd w are not alone in doing so, so I do not belive that death
> > itself is inherently evil. what is it then, is it untimely death? Is
> > the accidental death of a child considered that same as the murder of
> > a child, why, why not?
>
> That is where homicide and murder are distinguished. If there is
> negligence involved one may be considered guilty of homicide. If there
> is intent to kill for selfish purposes not involving one's own
> survival, it's murder.
Yet all are example of death, so what exaclty is it about one death
that is considered evil and onother not? I say agian it is the taking
away of all future choice that is the great evil in murder.
> > Perhaps I did not, see my post to Rigsy for an answer to that. But
> > still all the wars of all the times have not yet killed anywhere near
> > the number of people that the humble mossy has.
>
> I rather disagree. War and its aftermath have killed many, including
> those dying of cancer still near old nuclear research sites, in Japan,
> in southern Iraq, in the minefields....
> War is never really fought for ideals, religion, race, langage,
> culture, or any of those lame excuses. Those are simply mind-control
> devices used to motivate the hoi polloi into action, while the real
> motivation at the top is simply power and money.
Feel free to disagree, that is your choice and right, but you would be
wrong my friend to do so on this score.
> > I would argue that point until we are both fed up with each other,
> > given the chance, but for now let me just say that choice although
> > limited by numerous things still exists.
>
> > When you reply to this post as I'm sure you will, (or maybe you'll
> > choose not to!)
>
> > How will you reply, in what mannor, using what words? Are you saying
> > that you'll have no choice over this that something compels your
> > reply, and the words you'll use in it?
>
> Sure. Given my innate inclinations and the experiences I have enjoyed/
> endured, this is the kind of person I am: one that will respond after
> thinking a bit. While none of us knows really what we will do in any
> circumstance, given our makeup and history and the circumstances at
> hand, we will do what we are *bound* to do. This does not remove any
> mystery, since we cannot calculate all of those variables, but it is
> good to keep in mind that you are bound to your genes and memes. This
> does not excuse anyone's actions, once they understand the import of
> those actions.
Yes you are right there are many fetters to our choices, we can all
only choose according to our situations. Although bound to do? Naaa
we can choose to act in any way, in any situation. Maybe in ways that
are not consided normal or correct for the situation even. The man
being chased by a group of skinheads would do better to run, but he
can choose to turn and fight even if that choice leads to serious
injury or his death.
> > Again I think this touches upon what Allen says about 'Do no harm' It
> > is impossible you know to live a life which does no harm at all, I
> > applaud the trying though, and indeed is how I attempt to live my own
> > life.
>
> As animals we must kill to survive. Intentional causing of pain is
> another matter, and meat can be eaten with reverence and apology, and
> be pure. Apology is a great gift.
Well I think that there are at least two was tosee this one, and
perhaps more?
I agree with you BTW, but I can at least offer the opposite view for
your consideration. Being at the very top of the food chain we can of
course just kill our live stock whilly nilly to eat without any
applogy or respect shown at all. It is our very humaness that says
otherwise.
> > We all know arse-ish people who seem to delight in the misery of
> > others, and how do we mostly deal with these people? Yep we seperate
> > ourselves from then, ohhh there is that individual choice again. If
> > it is not possible to seperate our selves from these destructive
> > people, rightly so, we have laws to help us make that choice a
> > reality.
>
> If you are strong enough, be close to your friends, but even closer to
> your enemies. They may become friends after all.
I have heard this, it is not the way I normaly choose to react to
arseish people though, I an generaly happyer and less stressed with
these types out of my life.
> > Prison, is a strange one for me. I have actualy spent some time
> > thinking about the conecpt of prison over the years and what I can
> > say, is that at least in the UK we still work on the old Victorian
> > prison concept, that is that prision is meant to rehabilitate. I'm
> > unsure as to how the rest of the worlds prision system are supposed to
> > work, or what their concept is. I can also say that I belive the UK
> > general populous would like to see this old concept scrapped and see
> > the prision as a punishment conecept put in it's place.
>
> Ack!!! They are wrong. The penal system punishes those that have
> already been neglected and abused too much, and need help.
> Rehabilitation is much more humane, efficient, and logical. They need
> to learn how to be productive. They've never been taught that (for the
> most part) and greatly appreciate it and make the most of it given the
> chance.
Ahhh apart from the fact that at least here in the UK this Victorian
concept of the job of prision has simply not worked, not at all. And
make no mistake at present the job of our prision system is still
rehabilitation.
> > What exaclty is it about prison you don't agree with?
>
> The punishment, as I think I've made clear. Pastors do the most good
> in prison. Guards are scurvy and spread mental disease, generally.
Granted that is true, I have some experiance of the prision system, no
not myself but one of my brothers has been in and out for many years,
he like most prisioners here are recividists, it is only now with his
third child born, that he has decided that he should attempt to medn
his ways. Prison did not rehabilitate my father either.
> > > > On Jul 14, 1:49 pm, Tony Orlow <t...@lightlink.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jul 12, 5:02 am, "leerevdoug...@googlemail.com" <l...@rdfmedia.com>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > Hey Tony,
>
> > > > > > Indeed and I would go further and say that good and evil are wholey
> > > > > > subjective.
>
> > > > > > Ben declares that murder is normaly counted as evil, but sometimes it
> > > > > > serves the greater good. I would ask you all to consider why exaclty
> > > > > > is it that the majority agree with this.
>
> > > > > > In short why is murder evil?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -...
>
> read more »
0 comments:
Post a Comment