Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

There is nothing wrong with killing another human being

Page 1 of 4 [ 52 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Yupa
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 May 2005
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,520
Location: Florida

29 May 2010, 5:03 pm

The only reason most of us don't is because we're aware that the people around us have connections. If someone has no connections, taking their life is not a threat to your survival.
The fear you'd feel wouldn't be "guilt," it would be the fear of getting caught and the knowledge of what would happen if you did.

Second, taking other human beings' lives culls down the population. Human beings, like any other animal, eventually suffer from overpopulation unless there is a predator to cut their numbers. In lieue of a serious natural predator, it is other human beings' duty to take on that role.
Thus if you have no connections to another person killing them should not be considered a problem: it's only a problem if it puts you (the killer) personally in danger from the law or from that person's friends and family.

I know several of you are going to say you would never kill another human being even if there were no consequences. The fact is, however, you would, no matter how much you protest. To say otherwise is cowardice and indicates a feeble heart.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

29 May 2010, 5:49 pm

Yupa wrote:
The only reason most of us don't is because we're aware that the people around us have connections. If someone has no connections, taking their life is not a threat to your survival.
The fear you'd feel wouldn't be "guilt," it would be the fear of getting caught and the knowledge of what would happen if you did.

Second, taking other human beings' lives culls down the population. Human beings, like any other animal, eventually suffer from overpopulation unless there is a predator to cut their numbers. In lieue of a serious natural predator, it is other human beings' duty to take on that role.
Thus if you have no connections to another person killing them should not be considered a problem: it's only a problem if it puts you (the killer) personally in danger from the law or from that person's friends and family.

I know several of you are going to say you would never kill another human being even if there were no consequences. The fact is, however, you would, no matter how much you protest. To say otherwise is cowardice and indicates a feeble heart.


There is only one justification for killing another human: defense of self or family. Justification is a moral issue. On the other hand many could easily kill another human for very little cause. Which is very bad news for maintaining a quiet and peaceful social order.

ruveyn



Asmodeus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,520

29 May 2010, 6:13 pm

You know, both these posts could be appened to the "why is the US at war?" thread.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

29 May 2010, 8:19 pm

Asmodeus wrote:
You know, both these posts could be appened to the "why is the US at war?" thread.


The U.S. is at war because we are surrounded by hostile enemies who wish to destroy this nation (the U.S.) and to kill Americans. The major threat is Islamic religious fanatics.

The U.S. is bound to be disliked. We live well (despite inequities in our economy) and we are not covered with sh*t is as 2/3 of the world. In a wold that is mostly starving, being well fed is a crime against humanity according to some people.

ruveyn



makuranososhi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,805
Location: Banned by Alex

29 May 2010, 8:57 pm

Yupa wrote:
I know several of you are going to say you would never kill another human being even if there were no consequences. The fact is, however, you would, no matter how much you protest. To say otherwise is cowardice and indicates a feeble heart.


So having convictions equates to a feeble heart... yeah, I'm not buying that story. To resort to taking another life unless absolutely necessary is abhorrent to me. Would I kill to protect my family? Quite possibly. But the toll it would take on me after the fact would also be a tremendous burden.


M.


_________________
My thanks to all the wonderful members here; I will miss the opportunity to continue to learn and work with you.

For those who seek an alternative, it is coming.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

29 May 2010, 9:27 pm

Yupa wrote:
The only reason most of us don't is because we're aware that the people around us have connections. If someone has no connections, taking their life is not a threat to your survival.

Well, no, I think it is more like conditioning not to, and perhaps a discomfort with the idea.

Quote:
The fear you'd feel wouldn't be "guilt," it would be the fear of getting caught and the knowledge of what would happen if you did.

Prove it.

Quote:
Second, taking other human beings' lives culls down the population. Human beings, like any other animal, eventually suffer from overpopulation unless there is a predator to cut their numbers. In lieue of a serious natural predator, it is other human beings' duty to take on that role.

You haven't proven a duty. Not only that, but you haven't proven that human beings are like any other animal, given that as human wealth and technology improve, childbirth declines, your claim needs more justification. Even further, there is evidence suggesting that human beings breed less as income and technology improve, which seems unlike other animals.

Quote:
Thus if you have no connections to another person killing them should not be considered a problem: it's only a problem if it puts you (the killer) personally in danger from the law or from that person's friends and family.

"Should" is a moral term. You haven't proven that killing a person should not be considered a problem.

Quote:
I know several of you are going to say you would never kill another human being even if there were no consequences. The fact is, however, you would, no matter how much you protest. To say otherwise is cowardice and indicates a feeble heart.

I would kill another human being if there were no consequences, it just depends on the human being. Who would not kill an "uber-Hitler".

That being said, prove that saying otherwise "is cowardice and indicates a feeble heart".

The fact that your post is full of nothing but assertions is idiocy, and indicates a feeble mind.



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

29 May 2010, 11:48 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Yupa wrote:
The only reason most of us don't is because we're aware that the people around us have connections. If someone has no connections, taking their life is not a threat to your survival.

Well, no, I think it is more like conditioning not to, and perhaps a discomfort with the idea.

Quote:
The fear you'd feel wouldn't be "guilt," it would be the fear of getting caught and the knowledge of what would happen if you did.

Prove it.

Quote:
Second, taking other human beings' lives culls down the population. Human beings, like any other animal, eventually suffer from overpopulation unless there is a predator to cut their numbers. In lieue of a serious natural predator, it is other human beings' duty to take on that role.

You haven't proven a duty. Not only that, but you haven't proven that human beings are like any other animal, given that as human wealth and technology improve, childbirth declines, your claim needs more justification. Even further, there is evidence suggesting that human beings breed less as income and technology improve, which seems unlike other animals.

Quote:
Thus if you have no connections to another person killing them should not be considered a problem: it's only a problem if it puts you (the killer) personally in danger from the law or from that person's friends and family.

"Should" is a moral term. You haven't proven that killing a person should not be considered a problem.

Quote:
I know several of you are going to say you would never kill another human being even if there were no consequences. The fact is, however, you would, no matter how much you protest. To say otherwise is cowardice and indicates a feeble heart.

I would kill another human being if there were no consequences, it just depends on the human being. Who would not kill an "uber-Hitler".

That being said, prove that saying otherwise "is cowardice and indicates a feeble heart".

The fact that your post is full of nothing but assertions is idiocy, and indicates a feeble mind.


You are assuming a mind. Also unproven.



NeantHumain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,837
Location: St. Louis, Missouri

30 May 2010, 12:40 am

I don't know where you're going with this, playing devil's advocate. You're advocating a psychopathic amorality that, well, pretty much only a psychopathic serial killer would hold.

Yupa wrote:
The only reason most of us don't is because we're aware that the people around us have connections. If someone has no connections, taking their life is not a threat to your survival.

Fear of punishment, in development psychology, as the main restraint on antisocial behavior is a phase of development found primarily in young children and is known as the premoral level of development in Lawrence Kohlberg's theory of moral development; actually this is considered Stage 1 of the premoral level of development. Most adults function above this level.
Yupa wrote:
The fear you'd feel wouldn't be "guilt," it would be the fear of getting caught and the knowledge of what would happen if you did.

Most people would feel horror, disgust, and shame at the mere thought of killing someone, let alone intentionally harming them to a lesser degree. Soldiers have committed suicide over the guilt they've felt after killing another human being in socially sanctioned combat.
Yupa wrote:
Second, taking other human beings' lives culls down the population. Human beings, like any other animal, eventually suffer from overpopulation unless there is a predator to cut their numbers. In lieue of a serious natural predator, it is other human beings' duty to take on that role.

Non sequitur. You have not shown that human overpopulation is a problem, and you definitely have not shown that a predator is necessary to prevent it. Even if a problem of overpopulation existed, you have not shown that your brutal method is the solution.
Yupa wrote:
I know several of you are going to say you would never kill another human being even if there were no consequences. The fact is, however, you would, no matter how much you protest. To say otherwise is cowardice and indicates a feeble heart.

This is so grossly bizarre, I cannot even proffer a response to it.



silentbob15
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 802

30 May 2010, 1:19 am

Yupa, if I was you I would seek immediate help, go to a doctor maybe go to a hospital somewhere before you hurt someone



Yupa
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 May 2005
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,520
Location: Florida

30 May 2010, 1:23 am

ruveyn wrote:
Asmodeus wrote:
You know, both these posts could be appened to the "why is the US at war?" thread.


The U.S. is at war because we are surrounded by hostile enemies who wish to destroy this nation (the U.S.) and to kill Americans. The major threat is Islamic religious fanatics.

ruveyn


One infamous isolated incident of religious terrorism does not necessarily equate to being "surrounded by hostile enemies"



Yupa
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 May 2005
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,520
Location: Florida

30 May 2010, 1:24 am

Sand wrote:

You are assuming a mind. Also unproven.


You equate "having a mind" with believing everything you've been told rather than taking a few hours to sit and think and formulate your own opinion.

The only reason your response is so hostile is because it challenges what your traditional upbringing insists is gospel.



Asmodeus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,520

30 May 2010, 1:33 am

ruveyn wrote:
Asmodeus wrote:
You know, both these posts could be appened to the "why is the US at war?" thread.


The U.S. is at war because we are surrounded by hostile enemies who wish to destroy this nation (the U.S.) and to kill Americans. The major threat is Islamic religious fanatics.

The U.S. is bound to be disliked. We live well (despite inequities in our economy) and we are not covered with sh*t is as 2/3 of the world. In a wold that is mostly starving, being well fed is a crime against humanity according to some people.

ruveyn

Have you been watching Fox News again? :P



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

30 May 2010, 3:47 am

Yupa wrote:
Sand wrote:

You are assuming a mind. Also unproven.


You equate "having a mind" with believing everything you've been told rather than taking a few hours to sit and think and formulate your own opinion.

The only reason your response is so hostile is because it challenges what your traditional upbringing insists is gospel.


I don't need instruction in being violently disgusted with an individual who delights in harming or killing other individuals. I do not need instruction in emotional reactions. I find your line of reasoning totally abhorrent and indicative of defective mental facilities.



Asmodeus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,520

30 May 2010, 5:50 am

Yupa wrote:
The only reason most of us don't is because we're aware that the people around us have connections. If someone has no connections, taking their life is not a threat to your survival.
The fear you'd feel wouldn't be "guilt," it would be the fear of getting caught and the knowledge of what would happen if you did.

Second, taking other human beings' lives culls down the population. Human beings, like any other animal, eventually suffer from overpopulation unless there is a predator to cut their numbers. In lieue of a serious natural predator, it is other human beings' duty to take on that role.
Thus if you have no connections to another person killing them should not be considered a problem: it's only a problem if it puts you (the killer) personally in danger from the law or from that person's friends and family.

I know several of you are going to say you would never kill another human being even if there were no consequences. The fact is, however, you would, no matter how much you protest. To say otherwise is cowardice and indicates a feeble heart.

It therefore would be prudent to create an incurable pathogen of controllable lethality that could be introduced freely to the population, yet was not infective enough to threaten it's survival on the whole.



AIDs conpiracy. :lmao:



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

30 May 2010, 8:27 am

Now that we are informed as to Yupa's callousness towards killing other humans I suppose it would follow from the same ethical standpoint he is also enthusiastic about raping women and molesting small children.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

30 May 2010, 8:31 am

Asmodeus wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Asmodeus wrote:
You know, both these posts could be appened to the "why is the US at war?" thread.


The U.S. is at war because we are surrounded by hostile enemies who wish to destroy this nation (the U.S.) and to kill Americans. The major threat is Islamic religious fanatics.

The U.S. is bound to be disliked. We live well (despite inequities in our economy) and we are not covered with sh*t is as 2/3 of the world. In a wold that is mostly starving, being well fed is a crime against humanity according to some people.

ruveyn

Have you been watching Fox News again? :P


No. I don't watch Fox "News". I have just been paying attention for the last 65 years. Human envy and resentment is as real as rain. The less well off believe they are in deep do do because of those better off than themselves. It has always been this way. If the U.S. were as poor as Uganda or Haiti no one would care about us. And they certainly would not blame us for bad weather or ants at their picnics.

ruveyn