Saddam Hussein

[Tie Guy]

Originally posted by Crazy_dog no.3

Tie Guy- Why nuke the whole city? Why not bomb just the bases?

In other words: U are somewere in town. A man in the town has a detonator with which he going to blow up ur whole family, but for some strange reason or another he is only able to do it in about 5 minutes time, so u still have some time.

He is standing in the middle of a crowd of his friends. Now his friends are pacifist. In order to get to him u don't shoot through them, do u? U find another way.

 

I'm not saying it was neccessarily the right thing to do, but people shouldn't just go around saying we bombed a city just to kill civilians, because we didn't.

 

 

Avoiding the question, C'jais? It wouldn't be because you can't answer it, would it?

 

Raping is clearly wrong because it violates another person, and does something harmful to them against their will, as well as causing extreme emotional greif and physcological damage. Now I'll accept your answer, if you have one.

 

Animals, i would say, are not capable of determining right for wrong on an individual basis. They can tell what they like and don't like, but not what is good and what is bad. I really can't think of one thing that would display a moral code of any sort in animals of any kind, tribe or not. Attacking those who attack cubs or "children" or what not is not a moral decision, BTW, but a genetic survival instinct. Indeed not even all animals defend their children.

 

Humans, on the other hand, are capable of distinquishing what is right and wrong, and that is why laws were formulated based on that subconscious knowledge. Every human race, civilized or not, that i have ever heard of or studied through history has had some sort of law, and that was well before the times of the bible or judeo concepts. Now, some laws were different among different people, but the core laws remained the same. Where do you think everyone got essentially the same laws? They certainly didn't all call each other up and decide. Therefore there must be some sort of internal code that exists within all humans that causes the concept of good and evil. To deny it, is to deny humanity.

 

And you know, i am postulating a higher code, but not one that defines good and evil, one that IS good and evil. The concept is a higher code inate within all humans from the dawn of time. You're right, I can't do it without postulating a higher code, because that's the only way that makes sense. Be careful with your words, though, because it is a not a judge, just a list of sorts. Everyone knows what is right and wrong, some people simply choose not to act on it all the time, and that is their choice, with only themselves (or a government created by the same code)to judge them.

 

 

Speaking of which, this concept is also what causes guilt. Now, you're obviously not Christian or anything close to it (probably not even agnostic), so i'll use you and aetheists in general as an example. Now, i'm sure at some point in your life, probably in your childhood, you cheated on a test or stole something or did something that would be considered wrong, no? How did it make you feel? Unless you're lying, it made you feel bad about yourself, that is, guilty. If you didn't feel guilty then something is wrong with you (not being able to determine right and wrong is one thing that makes you legally insane). Now i doubt that you grew up in a family that taught Christian values, so what made you (or others) feel guilty? Well, the only explanation is the subconscious adherence to a moral code, however strict. With your views, you probably wouldn't feel guilty about anything now, and that is because you've probably done so many things that go against the code that you've learned (by neccessity) to ignore it altogether. However, if you still do feel guilty, then i thank you for proving my point.

 

What other explanation is there for guilt? You may say that for Christians and other "religious people" it comes from their own moral teachings since childhood. But what about people that have been aetheists since childhood? I know they feel guilt, because i've seen interviews with convicts. If you truly believe what you now say, you should never feel guilt, but i'd bet everything i own that you and others like you have at least once.

[Admiral Odin]

Originally posted by C'jais

[bMaybe you should try remembering how exactly you got all the land you did. The Indians sure as hell didn't just give it up. [/b]

 

Yes Americans did force indians off their land, but let's not forget history. The Europeans did the same thing when the colonized the Americas. Specifically England, France, and Spain (being the major countries back then).

 

Also this has nothing to do with comparing the US to Saddam. Reason why: THe people who condoned those actions long since lost power and are dead. Saddam on the other hand is still in power.

 

You can bring up all the history you want however that means little, the farther you go back the less it matters. Why because those who did such things are no longer in power. Take using an atomic bomb on Japan, that was Truman and he no longer leads this country.

[Heavyarms]

Tie Guy is right, the past is in the past: this is about now, and about how.

 

 

Saddam is a threat, whether or not you like it. He needs to be eliminated.

 

As for good and evil: they believe killing for a cause is good.

 

Killing is evil.

 

Therefore, the logical deduction is they are evil if killing is evil & they are killing. if a=b and b=c, then a=c, right? Some logic, right?

 

as for c'jais: We didn't shoot them over there, and use our guns as cattle prods. We told them to move, which most of them did, except for the Cherokee, in the Trail of Tears. In fact, the French and Spanish armed the Indians on the frontier. Little Big-Horn, anyone? They fought back.

[Natopo]

I must say that Admiral and Tie Guy have said some very interesting things. I'll be surprised if C'jais can counter those. I certainly couldn't, even if I wasn't on Admiral's and Tie Guy's side.

[Artoo]

No, I'd like to hear you explain to me why raping is evil. Because it hurts other people, right? And why is that evil?

 

Also this has nothing to do with comparing the US to Saddam. Reason why: THe people who condoned those actions long since lost power and are dead. Saddam on the other hand is still in power.

 

You can bring up all the history you want however that means little, the farther you go back the less it matters. Why because those who did such things are no longer in power. Take using an atomic bomb on Japan, that was Truman and he no longer leads this country.

 

I'd like to see the reaction of a woman who has been raped if you told that to her. Rape is a violation of personal space without consent, simple as that. It can be verbal, mental, physical, or emotional. It is not confined to intercourse.

 

*ignores the Saddam/US crap being thrown around*

[Rogue Nine]

On topic, people. Please. You wanna debate this, start another thread. Stay your course. And watch it with the name-calling.

[darthfergie]

Originally posted by C'jais

No, I'd like to hear you explain to me why raping is evil. Because it hurts other people, right? And why is that evil?

 

No matter how you twist and bend it, the only way you can explain this is by postulating that there's a higher code of morals of sorts. A higher judge, if you will. The concept of evil was invented to justify the violence and punishment.

 

Most animals have had no need to invent such concepts (except those living in tribes, such as monkies) - are they evil too? Do you have any idea how much brutality goes on in the animal kingdom? It's survival out there, and your cultural constructs bears no meaning in such an environment.

 

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?

 

Good grief. You are basically saying. "It's not wrong to rape someone. It's a natural instinct." WTF HAVE YOU BEEN SMOKING?

 

We are not animals. We have a moral code and laws to back them up. It is one of the highest crimes to violate someone against their will. We are not dogs here. Most of us don't go down the street and see a woman that looks good to us and rape them. That is SICKENING.

 

The vast majority of the world acknowledges rape and other EVIL crimes and have passed several laws that deal out high penalties for the crime. In many countries it has the death penalty attached to it.

 

Do you WANT total anachy? Because that is what you are throwing your support behind right there. No such thing as evil my arse. You can blab all you want with you radical nonsense of no real evil while you rot in a jail cell.

 

[edit] didn't see your post R9, but don't worry. I don't figure on posting to much in the war threads anyway[/edit]

[Zygomaticus]

Sorry, R9, I have to post...please forgive me...

 

I see c'jais's point here. There is no big judge (that we know of), and so he seems to be saying, "Who has said rape is wrong? Some person? What gives that person the right to correct me..."

 

I don't mean literally you, c'jais, but just a rapist. And true, there is no big judge who decides what is wrong, but as a human there are certain rights we exercise, and one is the right to not-be-raped. As Artoo said, one is disrespecting another's space without consent and whether or not some "big judge" says it's right or wrong, it's wrong.

 

We have evolved that way. Survival of the fittest does not really apply to humans. It's survival of the smartest, survival of the best.

[pbguy1211]

Do some of you smoke crack before you post here?

 

If you believe there's nothing wrong with raping someone, go out and do it... see if you aren't shunned by all your friends after you're convicted, and thrown in jail... not to mention most likely beaten before you get there in some form.

 

How dare you say raping someone isn't "evil"... i hope you get tossed in the slammer for something stupid and some guy named bubba violates your ass. then maybe you'll understand how it's "evil"

[Tie Guy]

Just this one little thing, niner, and i'll hopefully be done.

 

You might say that the same higher code that is good and evil is also the moral code that gives us rights. I do not believe that you can say there is no good and evil but there are human rights. Both are a reference to a higher code that is above all humankind. You mihgt consider the same "judge" who dictates good and evil also allocates our rights. You can't have basic human rights and no good or evil at the same time, because, according to you, there is nothing higher than individuals.

[Ratmjedi]

All I have to say is that people have their views and have the right to have them no matter how absurd they are.

 

I have my view's and that is my justifacation for going to war with Iraq. Also no one person on this board had all the answers. They may debate back and forth countering everything but it still isn't going to answer everything.

 

I think that man is a maniac for killing some of his people. You can also say that about any person because every one has commited wrong even though it may not exist in their mind. But how long has this man been in power?

 

You can say that the US is filled with a nut aswell but atleast the person loses office in a few years. Saddam has been in power for a great deal of time and has been doing stuff like this for a while now but then I might be giving out false information that my government wants me to believe:rolleyes:

 

But why does everyone outside the US think that there media is fed to them so cleanly?

 

If you think that we are being mislead then think again cause I am sure that you guys are too but you are thinking just like I am saying that my government would never do that.

 

People keep saying that we are the baddies when really the world is filled with them but we are just the obvisous ones cause we are a succesful country that has money while another may be starving to death while its own government is commiting genocide.

 

I may not have all the intelect in the world like most of you do but I do know what I am talking about. I believe what we are doing is right just as they are over then in Iraq too. But they are surrendering aren't they? We've managed to lose the most lifes from the military side while they surrender. I don't know about you guys but I have a lot of friends that are over there risking their lifes while there are people here fighting about it and complaining and whining. I doubt many of you have a lot of friends that are in the military and that are currently over so please stop talking about us like we are "bad" cause every country has **cked up but has just managed to forget about and never had it thrown back in their face like we have.

 

I just know that when this world is on the brink of total war, cause Iraq isn't even a drop of the Iceberg, you guys are going to look back on this and say what we were thinking. The French have obviously forgotten what the US, Canada, and British, and I think Aussies (forgive me if I have forotten any other countrys) did on June 6, 1944 when they took he first step in liberating France and a lot of Europe (including Belgium). We have kicked so much @$$ and saved so much @$$ but when the time comes I hope that we just let the world go down the toilet as we watch while country's like France ask for assitance when they are caught with there pants down.

 

Hopeully we will be the last of the two country's when this world turns to one big apple core.

 

 

[Darth Groovy]

I saw A Biography on Saddam a couple of years ago long before Bush, or the thread of war. From what I understand he was rejected by the Iraqi army and a social reject until he joined the Bath Party. His party overthrew the goverment and his mentor was the figurehead while Saddam secretly ran the show. When he died, Saddam was the convenient replacement. He did some good things until the power went to his head, and he grew paronoid. He accused at least 60 people of conspiracy, and of those 60 people(some were members of the Bath Party) he Executed 22. There is no crime he is incapable of. His biggest downfall, is that he is a sad paronoid man who rules with an Iron Fist.

[Heavyarms]

they may have now found a chemical weapons plant. This changes everything. I hope it is one, just so I can make a thread that says "I told you so!" but anyways, what if he has this? I think this changes the whole game because now France, China, Russia, Germany, will support this war, as well as these anti-war people.

[Natopo]

Well, some of you people supporting Iraq got your wish. Yesterday there was an article in the newspaper about those DARN Russians sending military supplies to Iraq. Filthy, dirty, rotten Russians.

[Breton]

Originally posted by Heavyarms

Saddam is a threat, whether or not you like it. He needs to be eliminated.

 

But there is no doubt Bush is a much larger threat. He has already ruined the Europe-US relationship and messed up the entire middle east. Saddam, on the other hand, has done nothing threatening the last few years. I ask as the German foreign minister asked: Warum jetzt?

 

As for good and evil: they believe killing for a cause is good.

 

Killing is evil.

 

Firstly, who are you to judge what's evil and what's not? I hate the fact that certain people think they can play God.

 

Secondly: If there was a terrorist who was just about to blow up a building wich would have caused thousands of deaths, would you shoot him to stop it? If you would, you are after your own opinion evil.

 

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?

 

Good grief. You are basically saying. "It's not wrong to rape someone. It's a natural instinct." WTF HAVE YOU BEEN SMOKING?

 

I would've expect better behaviour from a moderator.

 

We are not animals. We have a moral code and laws to back them up. It is one of the highest crimes to violate someone against their will. We are not dogs here. Most of us don't go down the street and see a woman that looks good to us and rape them. That is SICKENING.

 

Excuse me? Humans are animals, no point in denying that. The only difference is that we have higher developed brains.

 

Do you WANT total anachy? Because that is what you are throwing your support behind right there. No such thing as evil my arse. You can blab all you want with you radical nonsense of no real evil while you rot in a jail cell.

 

It's a strange thing, pretty mystifying, that people are so convinced that evil excists, yet they cannot explain what it is. There is no universal rule of what's bad and what's not, just accept that. As long as a man is doing what he belives is right, he is not (per definition) evil. Now, Saddam kills to remain in power, and he belives him being in power is a good thing. So no matter how you try to twist it, Saddam isn't evil. No one is.

 

How dare you say raping someone isn't "evil"... i hope you get tossed in the slammer for something stupid and some guy named bubba violates your ass. then maybe you'll understand how it's "evil"

 

Imagine this: You and a woman is the only people left on earth. The reproduction of the two of you is the only thing that can save the human race. But by some reason, the woman plainly refuses to have sex with you. Then all of the sudden, it doesn't become all that wrong to rape her, since you can save the entire human race by doing it.

 

But why does everyone outside the US think that there media is fed to them so cleanly?

 

All right, imagine this: Three African tribes, two of the disgusts eachother and constantly comes with accutions against the other. Both of the thinks at the other tribe as evil. Yet there is another tribe, wich remains neutral in this tribe conflict, critizising both of the other tribes and trying to find a peaceful solution on the whole mess. Now, wich one of these three tribes do you belive have the cleanest media?

 

they may have now found a chemical weapons plant. This changes everything. I hope it is one, just so I can make a thread that says "I told you so!" but anyways, what if he has this? I think this changes the whole game because now France, China, Russia, Germany, will support this war, as well as these anti-war people.

 

Do you really think it changes anything? USA does not have any rights to go to war whether they have WoMDs or not. I have never said that Iraq doesn't have WoMDs, though I have said that it isn't proven they have (wich is still not proven), and that it's all wrong to assume they have. And about the "I told you so!": If you are pretty poor and spends your money on lottery, and then your friends think you shouldn't do that, but then you win. Then there's absolutly no reason to say "I told you so!" because you never knew you were going to win and it was all based on luck, and still a stupid thing to use money on lottery.

 

Well, some of you people supporting Iraq got your wish. Yesterday there was an article in the newspaper about those DARN Russians sending military supplies to Iraq. Filthy, dirty, rotten Russians.

 

You complain about anti-Americanism, yet you are more anti-Russian than anyone here are anti-American. This disgusts me.

[C'jais]

Originally posted by Tie Guy

Avoiding the question, C'jais? It wouldn't be because you can't answer it, would it?

 

No. Dodging the answer, are we?

 

Raping is clearly wrong because it violates another person, and does something harmful to them against their will, as well as causing extreme emotional greif and physcological damage. Now I'll accept your answer, if you have one.

 

Let me remind you of what we're discussing here. We're talking about good and evil - universal concepts, holding true for all humans. We're not talking about what you feel is wrong, but if you believe (and if you can prove) a universal moral code.

 

Now, I think rape is brutal and horrifying as well, but I don't assume that what I was taught to think holds true for everyone on earth. Rape is wrong in so many ways when speaking of preserving the human society. Keyword: Society. Morals are cultural constructs dependant on which society you live in.

 

Example: If you don't get taught at birth that it's wrong to steal, you won't feel a single drop of guilt doing it. Perhaps when you grow older, society takes on the role that your parents never had, and enforces a moral code by exerting punishment if you happen to break a law. But then again, some "evil actions" are not covered by the law (such as causing heartbreak and generally being an ass), and these have to be imprented by some sort of parent for the person to realize that they're "evil" or "morally wrong". Otherwise, that person won't give a damn about it.

 

Think about it, nearly every person on earth tries to justify their actions, even monsters such as Saddam - to him, "he's aware of the big picture" and "a great pragmatist". To him, the small human sacrifices he makes counterweights the good it brings (in his mind, of course).

 

Animals, i would say, are not capable of determining right for wrong on an individual basis.

 

On an individual basis? Take a loyal dog as an example. A dog that's been trained to protect its master through parenting - whether it be by punishing bad behaviour with less food, or through violence doesn't matter - the dog has now been imprented a very firm moral codex that it would bring great pain upon itself before betraying.

 

Most animals have this social code more or less imprented at birth - ants, dolphins, lions, monkies - a social code that upholds such virtues as sacrificing onself for the greater good of society, though it may differ to a large degree (an ant hive, fx). It's often centered around a hierarchic structure as evidenced in humans as well - a society needs a leader of some kind, or a ruling body. So far, plenty of similarities between humans and other animals. However, humans have gone beyond the crude social constructs shown in animal cultures. Humans, like other "tame animals" are very moldable - by raising a human a specific way, you're able to dictate which virtues should be upheld, and which should never come into play.

 

Example: A human raised by wild animals. Such a human, while perfectly sane, cares only about survival first and foremost, and the pack society (if raised by dogs, fx) second. Murder means nothing to this human, except if it's murder of a fellow pack mate. Quite clearly, the morals we take for granted as "human" are completely dicarded in this case. Similarily, I can bet you 10$ that I'd be able to raise a child that not only thinks it's morally right to treat women as dirt and rape them as he sees fit, no he also knows he's right. If you want examples of this, you need not look any further back in history than a few hundred years (hint: the dark ages and beyond).

 

Quite clearly, what you think are universal morals are really nothing more than cultural constructs. The society you live in defines your morals. Think for a minute, what if you hadn't been raised in USA, but as a homeless kid living on the streets of brazil. Would your morals be different? Hell yes. Your morals in this case would probably include a strong camaradarie with your fellow street kids and maybe a firm ideal of sharing the loot with them equally as well. But would you have any objections against stealing? No. Not even the first you did it - everywhere around you, people stole to get by. From child birth you were raised to know that it's okay to steal to get by. It's about survival, not about protecting rich people's possessions.

 

Every human race, civilized or not, that i have ever heard of or studied through history has had some sort of law, and that was well before the times of the bible or judeo concepts.

 

Think. Every social animal has laws built in their society, just as much as humans. For ants, the queen must be obeyed. For lions, the largest male gets the biggest share of the meat, and the females hunt for it and takes care of their young. Society would not exist were it not for laws (written or unwritten is irrelevant) - indeed, cultural norms and laws are what defines a society. Again, this has nothing to do with some sort of "universal" moral codex that holds true for all humans. Every human society has laws that are supposed to uphold the society in turn. But there are subtle and not so subtle differences in this. One society is the homeless one described above - another would be the vikings. Vikings did not have any objections against killing the enemy and their own slaves - such was the cultural norms based around a raider culture. They didn't object to outright raping women either - such was the cultural constructs in a male-dominated society.

 

Now, some laws were different among different people, but the core laws remained the same.

 

Just which core laws are you talking about?

 

To deny it, is to deny humanity.

 

This is you speaking as an American Christian. Christianity preaches healthy morals for the most part, but it's still nothing more than a cultural construct. A biological imperative is not the same as a cultural construct.

 

And you know, i am postulating a higher code, but not one that defines good and evil, one that IS good and evil.

 

Again, the homeless did not think he was right - he knew he was right.

 

 

 

Everyone knows what is right and wrong

 

Yes, my point exactly. But it's different from human to human based on upbringing. Not the same.

 

Now, you're obviously not Christian or anything close to it (probably not even agnostic)

 

Pheh.

 

Here, I can do stereotypes as well: To the Christian, everyone worshipping another god than the Christian one is a heathen by default, as they're really not worshipping God at all. Right? To the Christian, an agnostic is a person believing in false gods, and an atheist is someone not believing in anything at all.

 

Correction: I'm an agnostic, but you may call me atheist if you will.

 

Now, i'm sure at some point in your life, probably in your childhood, you cheated on a test or stole something or did something that would be considered wrong, no? How did it make you feel? Unless you're lying, it made you feel bad about yourself, that is, guilty.

 

Of course it did, but this has only to do with my society, my environment. I was "tamed" to know that it's bad to cheat or steal. It has nothing to do with a universal moral code inherent in all humans. Nothing.

 

If you didn't feel guilty then something is wrong with you (not being able to determine right and wrong is one thing that makes you legally insane).

 

Correction: You're right about the mentally insane part, but you make the false assumption to think that every human thinks it morally bad to cheat or steal. Therein lies the crucial difference.

 

Now i doubt that you grew up in a family that taught Christian values

 

WHAT!!?

 

If by "Christian values", you mean not lying, not killing, not stealing, treating other people good etc, then yes. If by "Christian values" you mean I must worship the one and only god, that Jesus is the saviour, that idols are unholy etc, then No.

 

With your views, you probably wouldn't feel guilty about anything now

 

What views are you now talking about? That rape is "good"? get a grip. An example is an example is an example. An example is not per default my "views".

[C'jais]

Originally posted by Heavyarms

Tie Guy is right, the past is in the past: this is about now, and about how.

 

Then stop whining about how much Europe "owes" you from past events.

 

Killing is evil.

 

Killing is bad for your society, which is why you've been taught to respect it as morally bad behaviour.

 

Is killing bad in all cases, full stop? Of course not.

 

Imagine yourself being thrown into the wilderness all by yourself. You need to kill in order to survive. There's no way around it. You may even be forced to cannibalize to get food. Slowly or quickly, it doesn't matter, your social norms will be eroded away until only a desperate core of Survival remains. This is all that matters, like it or not. It's not justifiable in the moral sense, but it's self-evident.

 

And strange, I haven't seen any of you comment on my post about Israel and their racist prime minister. Well, I'd at least have expected it from you, Heavyarms.

[C'jais]

Originally posted by darthfergie

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?

 

Coming from a super moderator. You sir, lack empathy to an astounding degree.

 

Good grief. You are basically saying. "It's not wrong to rape someone. It's a natural instinct." WTF HAVE YOU BEEN SMOKING?

 

Here's a clue: I didn't say rape was good. I said rape wasn't evil. There is no evil in this world. It's all in your head. Rape was an example, and I scorn at rape just as much as the next guy.

 

We are not animals. We have a moral code and laws to back them up. It is one of the highest crimes to violate someone against their will. We are not dogs here.

 

Haha. Funny how self righteous people have become as of late. Don't make humanity into something it isn't.

 

Most of us don't go down the street and see a woman that looks good to us and rape them. That is SICKENING.

 

Yes, to you and me. Do we dictate moral behaviour? No. Does the government dictate moral behaviour? Does the Bible?

 

Do you WANT total anachy? Because that is what you are throwing your support behind right there. No such thing as evil my arse. You can blab all you want with you radical nonsense of no real evil while you rot in a jail cell.

 

I really don't want to say this, but even as a super moderator, you're not qualified to post in this forum. Heck, you should by all rights have been stripped of your posting rights here from the very first flame.

 

[edit] didn't see your post R9, but don't worry. I don't figure on posting to much in the war threads anyway[/edit]

 

Split the thread. Don't lock it.

[Tie Guy]

Originally posted by C'jais

If by "Christian values", you mean not lying, not killing, not stealing, treating other people good etc, then yes. If by "Christian values" you mean I must worship the one and only god, that Jesus is the saviour, that idols are unholy etc, then No.

 

A typo sorry, i meant that you didn't grow up in that kind of home.

 

 

As for everything else you said, i still have not heard you answer the main point. I know that people brought up in a certain society have different morals and those morals are not something higher, i'm not saying they are. That is not the point, though.

 

I still have not heard an answer to why, every single society on earth, even those in complete isolation, have laws against murder (even if ony of members of the group) and other crimes like stealing the property of others (in the group) and such. You cannot say it is instinct because basic survival instinct would include only survival of one, to which murder or another group member would not. You would have to say that survival instincts dictate the safety of the group, which would then violate the pure instinct of individual survival theory. So, if everyone truly wanted to survive first and foremost, even if they were travelling in a group, murder would not be problem with anyone to assure individual survival, and thus no laws would be formed, and it would violate everyone's individual interests.

 

And the more you think about it, the more you realize that instinct IS a higher power, greater than any individual being, muich like good or evil or human rights.

 

Speaking of which, neither of ya'll answered my question about human rights. If you believe in humans rights (and judging from your previous discussions elsewhere i know you both do), then how can you say there is no higher power handing out these rights if there is no such thing declaring good and evil?

[Zygomaticus]

Originally posted by Natopo

Well, some of you people supporting Iraq got your wish. Yesterday there was an article in the newspaper about those DARN Russians sending military supplies to Iraq. Filthy, dirty, rotten Russians.

 

That's as aweful as anything that has been said here.

 

Anyway, the rest of this thread sounds like a Christian vs an Atheistic point of view.

[C'jais]

Originally posted by Tie Guy

As for everything else you said, i still have not heard you answer the main point. I know that people brought up in a certain society have different morals and those morals are not something higher, i'm not saying they are. That is not the point, though.

 

Are we really disagreeing then? Morals are ethics are good/evil.

 

I still have not heard an answer to why, every single society on earth, even those in complete isolation, have laws against murder (even if ony of members of the group) and other crimes like stealing the property of others (in the group) and such.

 

As I said before, society in general has norms, morals and laws that uphold the society itself. Humans are social animals, just like ants and lions. It wouldn't be a benefit to society if individuals were allowed to run amock and kill other members of the same species left and right.

 

Generally speaking, it's bad for society if people are allowed to kill, cheat and steal whenever they feel like it. But don't think it's outlawed full stop in any community. Some people always have the right to kill as they see fit. Again, the vikings - not only was it perfectly acceptable to kill, rape and mutilate the enemy, but the same was applied to "objects": thralls. Even fellow warriors were not spared as it was very common practice to take the law into your hands.

 

When in groups, it the group that matters. Thus, laws are put in place to ensure a working society.

 

When alone however, it is the individual that matters. Survival of the individual so that he/she can get back to society and mate.

 

You cannot say it is instinct because basic survival instinct would include only survival of one,

 

Basic survival instincts include the survival of the species. This is why salmon jump up waterfalls, why birds migrate and why we feel love. Love is what ties the community together, what makes them want to breed so the genepool can be advanced and what is often mistaken as a higher, universal force of "good".

 

And the more you think about it, the more you realize that instinct IS a higher power, greater than any individual being, muich like good or evil or human rights.

 

Again, there's a subtle yet very important difference between biological imperatives and cultural constructs.

 

Survival in society I would call a biological imperative, as we're social creatures first and foremost. However, how that society ensures its own survival is not a fixed imperative. Not stealing is obviously not a instinctual moral. Not killing anyone from the hostile community next door is not something universal. Heck, even not killing anyone from your own community is not a world spanning moral, but rather extremely dependant on how and where you are raised.

 

Speaking of which, neither of ya'll answered my question about human rights. If you believe in humans rights (and judging from your previous discussions elsewhere i know you both do), then how can you say there is no higher power handing out these rights if there is no such thing declaring good and evil?

 

Human rights are just a forced attempt at invoking these universal guidelines. The people putting these rights in place have obviously never been alone and tested to see just how far their upbringing would get them in the game of survival.

 

I don't believe in the human rights. I acknowledge them, and happen to agree with them because they coincide with my own morals. But I'm not as blind as to not see that they're not universal any more than it's universal to celebrate christmas. A good tradition, but the human species will live on regardless of it.

[darthfergie]

In other words...you're just arguing to be arguing. You specifically believe it is wrong to you, but you just want to make an off point.

 

I can deal with that. I've done it myself more than once, but I don't usually do it with such immoral issues as rape.

[Tie Guy]

Originally posted by C'jais

I don't believe in the human rights. I acknowledge them, and happen to agree with them because they coincide with my own morals. But I'm not as blind as to not see that they're not universal any more than it's universal to celebrate christmas. A good tradition, but the human species will live on regardless of it.

 

So basically you are saying that people don't deserve the right to live, right? You are saying that people don't deserve to have some sort of property and they don't deserve to say what they want, right? But rather that it just happens to be that way today and you accept it? Actually, it's not a question, that is what you are saying, whether you realize it or not. You accept that there are human rights to uphold communities' developed morals, but that people used to not deserve ot have the right to live, or not be raped for that matter. It's sad really, because i think it's clear people have had those rights from the beginning of time, and no one needed to teach them or tell them that they shouldn't kill their neighbor or friend.

 

Oh, and what isn't a "biological imperative"? You realize, i hope, that everything we do is driven biologically. Anger, happiness, sadness, depression, all of them are caused by different or different combinations and amounts of chemicals in our body/brain. Everything we do and feel and think is only electrical signals from our nerves to our brains and from our brain to our brain and from our brain to our nerves. If you choose to view survival as such, you are forced to view everything as such, which is fine, i guess.

 

But what causes these signals, then, that trigger instinct. You know that nothing can be done in biology or the body without some sort of stimulus, but what stimulates instinct? And more importantly, who/what put that stimulus or that instinct in place? Now, you probably choose to believe that it was evolution or something similar, and though i believe you are wrong, i won't debate that here and now. Still, where did the stimulus come from? Was it some sort of random developement that just happened to develope in every single on of the vastly different animals on earth at the same time? I, at least, think it is clear that is a stretch beyinf the elastic limit no matter how many years you give it, that every animal would have the same basic instincts at the same exact time in the evolutionary process.

 

The only answer, i believe, is some higher power that i cannot rightly explain without involving my religion. But still, there has to be something that drives instinct (that IS instinct, really), it cannot be broken down into anything purely and logically biological. You may choose to believe that that "higher power" is whatever you like, but how can you deny it's existance?

 

And do not say that it is "hard-wired", so to speak, into our brains, and thus is it's own stimulus. As i've already said, it is statisically impossible for that to happen in every species on the planet at the same time. It's not very good odds, and quite frankly believing that something created and set it all in place has a much higher chance of being true.

 

Still, even if you don't believe in evolution (though if you don't believe in an evolution then I don't know what you believe in because a creation would instantly justify the higher power) the point stands that anything besides some higher, driving force exists to power instinct, and, in my opinion, good and evil as well as human rights.

[Heavyarms]

Let's see... C'Jais seems to believe in the "Survival of the fittest" and that it justifies whatever happens to someone... you are a darwinist, aren't you?

[C'jais]

Originally posted by darthfergie

In other words...you're just arguing to be arguing.

 

In other words, a few people in here tried to argue that Saddam was "evil" and that their morals held true for everyone on earth.

 

I argued against that belief, and if you want to defend, start by reading my posts.

 

You specifically believe it is wrong to you, but you just want to make an off point.

 

Teehee. No.

 

I can deal with that. I've done it myself more than once, but I don't usually do it with such immoral issues as rape.

 

So I can't talk about rape here? Or what is this about?