Page 10 of 46 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213141520 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 200 of 914
  1. #181  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    I believe the Spartans believed in exposing their babies for a few days soon after birth, so as only to raise warriors. Is that similar enough?

    Surur
    No, try again. The key words here are 'torture for fun'.
  2. #182  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    No, because that is not possible to know outside of a sci-fi movie.

    Your hypothetical also presumes a certain determinism I would expect an atheist to reject.
    Its a hypothetical ideal, like a frictionless ball etc. Hoovs, just because it makes you uncomfortable does not mean you can just ignore it because it cant be real.

    Surur
  3. #183  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    http://www.google.com/search?q=Would...ad+a+chance%3F

    Its a pretty OLD question, and it exposes the fallacy of absolute morality.

    Surur
    Exactly why I have to roll my eyes.



    Whoops! There I go again.
  4. #184  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    So 100 000 Iraqi's die due to American intervention, and the country is in chaos, and all you care about is a few westerns who's throat got slit in cold blood (as happen in alleys in America daily)? Which is more disgusting? Where is the absolute morality now?

    Surur
    <sarcasm>

    No Iraquis(sic) were killed. We were greeted with roses. AND we're not even there any more, it only took at most six months

    </sarcasm>
  5. #185  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    No, try again. The key words here are 'torture for fun'.
    Obviously I and most people would be apposed to doing that, and would intervene if we could. However (hypothetically) if an alien race tortured their babies for fun, would we be as concerned. Or if animals did the same.

    If we dont feel as strongly about it, it clearly exposes that our feelings have no basis in absolute morality, but is more related to our innate biological programming, which makes it difficult to ignore a crying child for example.

    Also, with the amount of pedophiles around, I assume there is a certain percentage of people who could honestly answer yes.

    Surur
  6. #186  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    DaThomas....a point we can fully agree on!

    Very well said!

    ...............but is it happening?
    Are you doing so in your community?

    Have you been to a mosque to see what is being discussed?

    Have you been on any Muslim message boards to express your observation that the U.S. is increasingly looking at ALL muslims by the actions of the jihadists?

    Things like the site religion of peace don't encourage the moderates to push moderation, it makes them think they're a step closer to getting lynched.
  7. #187  
    But still Surur, you're avoiding my question, by throwing out distractions. So I will keep repeating it. Is what we're seeing now what Mohammad teaches? Would he be proud to see this? Is he smiling as he looks down upon the world and sees what people are doing in His name?
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  8. #188  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    Its a hypothetical ideal, like a frictionless ball etc. Hoovs, just because it makes you uncomfortable does not mean you can just ignore it because it cant be real.

    Surur
    The thing is that its a bad example of a hypothetical imperative. The only conceivable answer is that if I could see into the future and if I had no chance of changing the future then it would, in some instances, be okay to kill a baby. But I would need to ba able to both see into the future and not be able to change the future for this to be true.
  9. #189  
    Well, I'm in London. Whenever something bad related to Moslem's happen here I say to myself "I'm glad I'm not going to the Mosque, else MI5 would probably have my photo on file, and I might be hauled in for questioning (most people who are questioned get released btw)". Its really starting to feel like Stalinist Russia. And I do not blame the British Government for this, and for targeted searched etc. I would not dare carry a bag on the tube for example.

    I do however see the antecedents for the attacks on UK, and expected something to happen for a long time (like everybody else).

    People need to realize that some populations (especially Semitic ones) have very long memories, and they feel they have been provoked for a long time. An objective person would agree with them also.

    Surur
  10. #190  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    Obviously I and most people would be apposed to doing that, and would intervene if we could. However (hypothetically) if an alien race tortured their babies for fun, would we be as concerned. Or if animals did the same.

    If we dont feel as strongly about it, it clearly exposes that our feelings have no basis in absolute morality, but is more related to our innate biological programming, which makes it difficult to ignore a crying child for example.

    Also, with the amount of pedophiles around, I assume there is a certain percentage of people who could honestly answer yes.

    Surur
    You're skirting the issue with hypothetical situations and red herrings. The point is that there has been no culture that we know of that believes it is okay to torture babies for mere pleasure. Can you agree with that?
  11. #191  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    The thing is that its a bad example of a hypothetical imperative. The only conceivable answer is that if I could see into the future and if I had no chance of changing the future then it would, in some instances, be okay to kill a baby. But I would need to ba able to both see into the future and not be able to change the future for this to be true.
    What about the various laws allowing indefinite detention of people suspected of planning to commit terrorist acts. It could go so far that you may be arrested for visiting a web site or taking out a library book, and then disappeared to Gitmo. I suspect the people who made those laws would have no problem in killing Hitler, or his whole kindergarten class.

    Surur
  12. #192  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    You're skirting the issue with hypothetical situations and red herrings. The point is that there has been no culture that we know of that believes it is okay to torture babies for mere pleasure. Can you agree with that?
    To my knowledge, no. How is this relevant. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

    Surur
  13. #193  
    It is relevant because there is at least one thing we can all agree upon that is morally wrong. I mean, imaginary worlds aside. Now, if you want to base your whole argument on imaginary worlds then be my guest.
  14. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #194  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    What about the various laws allowing indefinite detention of people suspected of planning to commit terrorist acts. It could go so far that you may be arrested for visiting a web site or taking out a library book, and then disappeared to Gitmo. I suspect the people who made those laws would have no problem in killing Hitler, or his whole kindergarten class.

    Surur
    WTF are you talking about. How does any of these ramblings pertain to the situation of muslims burning embassies and threatening to kill anyone who in their opinon has insulted Mohammed?
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  15. #195  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    But still Surur, you're avoiding my question, by throwing out distractions. So I will keep repeating it. Is what we're seeing now what Mohammad teaches? Would he be proud to see this? Is he smiling as he looks down upon the world and sees what people are doing in His name?
    Lets see. I suspect he would probably be happy to see the Iraqi's defend Iraq against America, no matter how bloody (except for woman and children). He came from a barbaric time, when blood flowed freely.

    I suspect he would have been happy to see Moslems living in western countries, as he lived in diverse times with many pagan religions.

    I suspect he would have been unhappy at the riots, as he believed in spreading Islam by good example in foreign lands. Like Jesus, he also advocated following local laws and customs, as long as these did not conflict directly with the tenets of Islam.

    Regarding the specific cartoon, if a country was specifically blasphemous (not to him but to god of course) and insulting, I suspect he would have formally declared war against them if they did not apologize. I dont think he would have advocated the chaos of currently.

    Surur
  16. #196  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    It is relevant because there is at least one thing we can all agree upon that is morally wrong. I mean, imaginary worlds aside. Now, if you want to base your whole argument on imaginary worlds then be my guest.
    I did not say it would be morally wrong, just uncomfortable. Is it morally wrong because we are wasting human life for fun (and therefore no concrete gain)? Or are we just being squeamish due to our innate programming.

    Again, just because there is no example in culture does not mean it suddenly becomes law. The same may have been said e.g. about homosexual marriage a few decades ago.

    Surur
  17. #197  
    Man the misdirection spinning, the continual excuses and nods of sympathy towards terrorists and those who support them...and the inability to see the reality of events TODAY, is mind numbing.

    STATED: it is a small group doing it and the larger group is not speaking out against it.
    SPIN/EXCUSE: Demonizing a whole religion as murders.

    STATED: Blowing up childing eating dinner with their families in a restaurant, blowing up buses of innocent people, sawing off people heads, etc.. are wrong.
    SPIN/EXCUSE: Never mind that, look what happened 578 years ago, and answer to that.

    Plus they only had 1,436 years to learn that killing innocent people is not right, just be patient as they continue to kill for another 500 years which by that time they should have finally learned it was wrong to do all along.


    STATED: If public murders with published mission statements that this will happen again and againare in the name of the Islam and Muslims (in general), and they do not stand up against these acts committed in their name.....then they appear to be passively supporting these acts.
    SPIN/EXCUSE: Never mind that, look at the lone murders and muggers in your alleys

    Oh, and again look what happened 578 years ago, and answer to that.

    STATED: It has been shown that Muslims and those of Islam have a will to protest when wronged, then why would they not protest when murders are being committed in their name if they are actually members of a religion of peace.....but will burn down embassies if an offending cartoon is published.
    SPIN/EXCUSE:They are poor. They don't know what they are doing while in mob mode. It is more offensive to have another culture draw picture of Muhammad than to have others kill innocent people in their name.

    Never mind that look at abortion clinic crimes.

    SUMMARY
    In no way is the WHOLE of Islam or Muslims being accused of being head chopping, children bombing, suicide bombing, etc... terrorists. It is universally acknowledged that is is a MINORITY that are committing these UNIVERSALLY WRONG crimes.

    It was only stated that if the general population of Islam and Muslim do disagree with these tactics, that they do believe they are part of a religion of peace, and that they do not support killing innocent men, women, and children in the name of Allah, Islam, or Muslims......then why do they not protest to these acts being done with mission statements saying they will do them for them and demanding them to actually do them as well.

    Again, if the general population of any Mideast ethnic, nationality, or religious group is opposed to what is being done in behalf of them, and they protested (or at least spoke out) every time a terrorist group bombed a bus, a restaurant, a wedding, a hospital, a hotel, etc... then AQ would have their days numbered. They thrive off of the complacent attitudes of those they claim to do these acts for.
  18. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #198  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    Lets see. I suspect he would probably be happy to see the Iraqi's defend Iraq against America, no matter how bloody (except for woman and children). He came from a barbaric time, when blood flowed freely.

    I suspect he would have been happy to see Moslems living in western countries, as he lived in diverse times with many pagan religions.

    I suspect he would have been unhappy at the riots, as he believed in spreading Islam by good example in foreign lands. Like Jesus, he also advocated following local laws and customs, as long as these did not conflict directly with the tenets of Islam.

    Regarding the specific cartoon, if a country was specifically blasphemous (not to him but to god of course) and insulting, I suspect he would have formally declared war against them if they did not apologize. I dont think he would have advocated the chaos of currently.

    Surur
    I suspect he would have not been happy with the attack on the WTC or either of the other 2 planes since innocent women and children were involved

    I suspect he would not have been happy with the torture Saddam imposed on the Iraqi people and would have declared war on him instead of waiting for the US

    I suspect he would have accepted the apology that has been offered over the cartoon
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  19. #199  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    Is it morally wrong because we are wasting human life for fun (and therefore no concrete gain)? Or are we just being squeamish due to our innate programming.
    This attitude is why the atheist is so much more dangerous than the Islamist. The Islamist at least recognizes some limits upon his depravity. The humanist is not so restrained.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  20. #200  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Man the misdirection spinning, the continual excuses and nods of sympathy towards terrorists and those who support them...and the inability to see the reality of events TODAY, is mind numbing.

    STATED: it is a small group doing it and the larger group is not speaking out against it.
    SPIN/EXCUSE: Demonizing a whole religion as murders.

    STATED: Blowing up childing eating dinner with their families in a restaurant, blowing up buses of innocent people, sawing off people heads, etc.. are wrong.
    SPIN/EXCUSE: Never mind that, look what happened 578 years ago, and answer to that.

    Plus they only had 1,436 years to learn that killing innocent people is not right, just be patient as they continue to kill for another 500 years which by that time they should have finally learned it was wrong to do all along.


    STATED: If public murders with published mission statements that this will happen again and againare in the name of the Islam and Muslims (in general), and they do not stand up against these acts committed in their name.....then they appear to be passively supporting these acts.
    SPIN/EXCUSE: Never mind that, look at the lone murders and muggers in your alleys

    Oh, and again look what happened 578 years ago, and answer to that.

    STATED: It has been shown that Muslims and those of Islam have a will to protest when wronged, then why would they not protest when murders are being committed in their name if they are actually members of a religion of peace.....but will burn down embassies if an offending cartoon is published.
    SPIN/EXCUSE:They are poor. They don't know what they are doing while in mob mode. It is more offensive to have another culture draw picture of Muhammad than to have others kill innocent people in their name.

    Never mind that look at abortion clinic crimes.

    SUMMARY
    In no way is the WHOLE of Islam or Muslims being accused of being head chopping, children bombing, suicide bombing, etc... terrorists. It is universally acknowledged that is is a MINORITY that are committing these UNIVERSALLY WRONG crimes.

    It was only stated that if the general population of Islam and Muslim do disagree with these tactics, that they do believe they are part of a religion of peace, and that they do not support killing innocent men, women, and children in the name of Allah, Islam, or Muslims......then why do they not protest to these acts being done with mission statements saying they will do them for them and demanding them to actually do them as well.

    Again, if the general population of any Mideast ethnic, nationality, or religious group is opposed to what is being done in behalf of them, and they protested (or at least spoke out) every time a terrorist group bombed a bus, a restaurant, a wedding, a hospital, a hotel, etc... then AQ would have their days numbered. They thrive off of the complacent attitudes of those they claim to do these acts for.
    Does this not epitomize the lack of reaction we see from the Muslim population in general?

Posting Permissions