There is a great spiritual debate about the right to murder.
I have already crossed that line - not on my own - and not of my own independent volition - but there it is.
How do I choose to live moving forward - my version of the golden rule.
Treat others at least as well as THEY treat others.
It's fine to lie to a liar but not an honest man.
A murderer is on the table for being murdered - as long as they knew what they were doing.
This leaves me with a quandary - a line I never crossed - a question for Voat:
If a propagandist intentionally spreads lies which cause wars - is their life forfeit for all the death they caused?
I believe now - based on the state of the world - the answer is yes. If you propagandize for war - the blood is in your hands and you deserve what is coming to you.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] WorldClown [S] 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
So you only rape out of duty and justice - or when you project motive onto me you ascribe me with a different morality because of your deranged silver spoon ego?
[–] Had ago
Wow. Somehow me asking if you would rape a rapist means I personally want to rape or that I am saying you do. You understand the Socratic method, right? It forces the other person to actually understand their own stance and explain it. I poke a single hole in your idea and you freak the fuck out. And instead of thinking about your own stance, you immediately ad hominem me and get angry like a pink haired liberal banshee.
If someone questions you, why not actually reflect and figure out what you think instead of simply replying with anger and hatred in order to avoid actual introspection. Personal attacks help nothing, and I asked you a genuine question. Maybe you would learn something about yourself if you spent a few minutes thinking instead of being upset and offended that someone on the internet dare question your clearly well thought out morality.
[–] WorldClown [S] ago
"Somehow me asking if you would rape a rapist means I personally want to rape or that I am saying "
watch the shapeshifter change the context throughout the argument. Truly a disgusting cockroach mind.
When this person brought up rape - it was in the context of making an analogy to an eye for an eye. It was ACCUSATORY intentionally dishonest PROJECTION.
It was not - as later claimed - simply using the 'socratic method' - it was an attempt at using dishonesty to taint the argument.
This person knows exactly what they are trying to do. Thank Yahweh they aren't nearly intelligent enough to pull it off.
[–] WorldClown [S] ago
You didn't poke a hole in my idea by equivocating rape. You poked a hole in your own mask.
You're a liar and a fool.
[–] WorldClown [S] ago
You really are fucking stupid. You can't follow a simple conversation. Or you're trolling. But I have learned to just assume stupidity.