Phaltruism wrote:
Saying that violence and killing is wrong is naieve. If you let someone kill you, they could go on to kill the person who would eventually allow world peace.
You don't have to kill someone to stop them. Secondly, you have the ability to negotiate and run.
Phaltruism wrote:
If you killed a horrible person, like hitler for example, you might stop him from having a child that would come up with a cure for all diseases.
That would be another reason to not @#%^ with peoples life. Keep him from causing his atrocities, but is killing required to do that?
Phaltruism wrote:
We all die. Is it worse to be killed or to see everyone around you die before you go from natural causes?
Well, that goes back to whether or not you believe in an "afterlife."
Phaltruism wrote:
This is all based on morals which is subjective to a person's worldview. Violence and death can be morally right or wrong depending on your viewpoint. To say that in all cases it is morally wrong only works if everyone agrees.
The same goes for creating any type of new law. People love killing others; if they have an excuse to do it while "defending" themselves, all the better.
Phaltruism wrote:
Otherwise, the peace lover will be exploited or whiped out. And if there was no violence we could starve from world over-population or a meteor destroying the earth.
Natural disasters and the alliance of many minds can solve that problem.
Phaltruism wrote:
Basically, what I am saying is that there is no right and wrong. These are just concepts we invent to live in a society and to ensure the greatest chance of our survival.
Then what the @#%^'s a martyr?
If there's no right or wrong, *****=Bananas, and me saying so isn't right or wrong.
Edited, Jan 11th 2007 7:40pm by Pifuaa