Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Reply To Thread

The Internet: 1 Cat Abuser: 0Follow

QuoteReply
#177 Feb 18 2009 at 9:34 AM Rating: Decent
Elinda
View User Forum
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
TurinAlexander the Vile wrote:
The problem with conversation is that most of you are still hung up on the human life is sacred nonsense. Humans are no more special than ants in the grand scheme of things. Sure we are smarter and our construction projects are more impressive, but in the end we are much the same. We are born, we live, we die, we rot. The next generation comes along and does it all again. The only value you should place on any life is in it's direct impact on you.
No, what you are hung up on is a god-complex where you think you can place some sort of value on non-humans that goes beyond the physical.

Humans are sacred to humans because we are humans. We are the only species we can even begin to understand and treat as something more than just a sac of tissue, bones and fluids.






Edited, Feb 18th 2009 6:34pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#178 Feb 18 2009 at 9:35 AM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1681085903309
View User Forum
Scholar
******
21,720 posts
Elinda wrote:
The Great BrownDuck wrote:
I value my cats more than I value every last one of you people.


Hmmph.
I value my coffee pot more too. It brings me much satisfaction and joy. I love the way it gurgles when it's brewing up those last few drops of java goodness. It provides me with more value than random stranger #1. That doesn't mean I'd ever choose, or should even be allowed to choose, to put the welfare of my coffee pot above that of another human being. My opinion of that human being, in respect to my opinion of the coffee pot, is irrelevant.


The bold is the only part of your statement I disagree with. A person has no obligation to value another person's life over anything else.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#179 Feb 18 2009 at 10:00 AM Rating: Excellent
Annabella
View User Forum
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
The word "value" is pretty nebulous. You guys are all defining it differently.

Edited, Feb 18th 2009 1:02pm by Annabella
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#180 Feb 18 2009 at 10:08 AM Rating: Good
__DEL__1680481127345
View User Forum
Sage
******
21,262 posts
There's also religion messing around in this. Many people who believe in some variation on the higher power also believe human beings have souls, whereas lower animals do not.

I believe in evolution, but I also believe in some form of the flying spaghetti monster, which means I believe in the evolution of souls.

My kitty has a soul too, dammit. It's just not as highly evolved as a human's soul right now. Give it another million years, then the cats shall rule over the Earth.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#181 Feb 18 2009 at 10:15 AM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1592759070916
View User Forum
***
2,625 posts
Elinda wrote:
TurinAlexander the Vile wrote:
The problem with conversation is that most of you are still hung up on the human life is sacred nonsense. Humans are no more special than ants in the grand scheme of things. Sure we are smarter and our construction projects are more impressive, but in the end we are much the same. We are born, we live, we die, we rot. The next generation comes along and does it all again. The only value you should place on any life is in it's direct impact on you.
No, what you are hung up on is a god-complex where you think you can place some sort of value on non-humans that goes beyond the physical.

Humans are sacred to humans because we are humans. We are the only species we can even begin to understand and treat as something more than just a sac of tissue, bones and fluids.






Edited, Feb 18th 2009 6:34pm by Elinda


That's mighty arrogant, don't you think? Personally, I'm not a fan of humans. They're worse than cockroaches and then you bring religion in to it and it's just BLAH. Cockroaches with ridiculously religious agendas.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#182 Feb 18 2009 at 10:16 AM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1630282721753
View User Forum
Sage
*****
14,174 posts
Baron von Annabella wrote:
The word "value" is pretty nebulous. You guys are all defining it differently.

Edited, Feb 18th 2009 1:02pm by Annabella


Not all of us. Neither Elinda or I were using "personal" value. And thank God, because virtually everything here devolves into a semantics debate.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#183 Feb 18 2009 at 10:25 AM Rating: Excellent
__DEL__1649636418093
View User Forum
Sage
******
30,646 posts
TurinAlexander the Vile wrote:
The only value you should place on any life is in it's direct impact on you.


I couldn't disagree with that statement more.

The "value" you should put on any life is it's direct impact on everyone, not just you. You are not the only thing or person in the world. If you shoot some "random twit," to use your words, you are taking someone from any number of people who are going to be greatly impacted by that.

I mean, you can be a selfish *** all you want, I suppose. But, again, that's pretty pathetic.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#184 Feb 18 2009 at 3:23 PM Rating: Default
__DEL__1592267273743
Scholar
*****
10,359 posts
Quote:
It has been said in this thead, I forget by whom, that given the choice to shoot their pet or some "random twit they had never met," they would shoot the human and let their cat live.


It was me Smiley: disappointed

The implication being that, if you believed that anyone had said that, you should reread, carefully.

***

If it was the life of your loved ones when I didn't know that they were your loved ones, then the choice would be easy. If I did know, it would be harder. If it was you personally, it would be harder still.

See how these things work in degrees?

Edited, Feb 18th 2009 6:25pm by Pensive
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#185 Feb 18 2009 at 3:28 PM Rating: Excellent
__DEL__1649636418093
View User Forum
Sage
******
30,646 posts
Pensive wrote:
Quote:
It has been said in this thead, I forget by whom, that given the choice to shoot their pet or some "random twit they had never met," they would shoot the human and let their cat live.


It was me Smiley: disappointed

The implication being that, if you believed that anyone had said that, you should reread, carefully.

***

If it was the life of your loved ones when I didn't know that they were your loved ones, then the choice would be easy. If I did know, it would be harder. If it was you personally, it would be harder still.

See how these things work in degrees?

Edited, Feb 18th 2009 6:25pm by Pensive


No, I was thinking of Turin's post specifically, actually. And it seems he meant exactly what he said, but nice try.

As for the "degrees," can't you understand that any one would be someone's loved one? Doesn't that matter at all? So it's ok to sacrifice the life of a perfect stranger's life for that of your cat, with no regard to the fact that the stranger has a family that will miss him, parents that will mourn, possibly children, siblings? None of that matters, simply because you don't know them or their family?

I mean, damn, I'm called the "ice queen" in the OOT and all, but that's just down right frigid.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#186 Feb 18 2009 at 3:28 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1592267273743
Scholar
*****
10,359 posts
Honestly, did anyone ever imagine that I, katie, BD, and turin would be on the same side of an argument... ever, all at once?

Quote:
If you shoot some "random twit," to use your words, you are taking someone from any number of people who are going to be greatly impacted by that.

I mean, you can be a selfish *** all you want, I suppose.


You accuse someone of being a selfish *** in one breath while defending the selfish value that other's hold for people. Shoot an animal that's been adopted into a family and you'll still be hurting a lot of people in a great way.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#187 Feb 18 2009 at 3:30 PM Rating: Good
__DEL__1649636418093
View User Forum
Sage
******
30,646 posts
Pensive wrote:
You accuse someone of being a selfish *** in one breath while defending the selfish value that other's hold for people. Shoot an animal that's been adopted into a family and you'll still be hurting a lot of people in a great way.


Yeah, I guess so. Oh well.

And I don't care what you think, shooting someone's child will be hurting people in a much greater way than their pet.

It's about degrees.

Edited, Feb 18th 2009 5:32pm by Belkira
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#188 Feb 18 2009 at 3:31 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1592267273743
Scholar
*****
10,359 posts
Quote:
As for the "degrees," can't you understand that any one would be someone's loved one?


Patently and unarguably false.

Quote:
So it's ok to sacrifice the life of a perfect stranger's life for that of your cat, with no regard to the fact that the stranger has a family that will miss him, parents that will mourn, possibly children, siblings? None of that matters, simply because you don't know them or their family?


You really and truly don't see how blatantly hypocritical you are being? Really? I can turn this completely around just by swapping the places of the animals and humans. If it's not okay to sacrifice the life of a stranger only because they are important to someone else (and not as elinda is arguing, because they have inherently more worth or something) then it is also not okay to sacrifice MY cat for YOUR loved ones.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#189 Feb 18 2009 at 3:32 PM Rating: Good
__DEL__1622420402685
Scholar
*****
19,369 posts
Pensive wrote:
Honestly, did anyone ever imagine that I, katie, BD, and turin would be on the same side of an argument... ever, all at once?


You're all twats. So what?
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#190 Feb 18 2009 at 3:32 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1592267273743
Scholar
*****
10,359 posts
Quote:
And I don't care what you think, shooting someone's child will be hurting people in a much greater way than thier pet.


You'd have to be able to quantify the value we put on other beings. Can you?

Quote:
You're all twats. So what?


I hold you in less regard than nearly anyone else I can think of on this forum, but my opinion doesn't matter very much to your ego right?

See how pointless that was.

Edited, Feb 18th 2009 6:34pm by Pensive
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#191 Feb 18 2009 at 3:35 PM Rating: Excellent
__DEL__1649636418093
View User Forum
Sage
******
30,646 posts
Pensive wrote:
Quote:
As for the "degrees," can't you understand that any one would be someone's loved one?


Patently and unarguably false.


No, it's not false.

Pensive wrote:
Quote:
So it's ok to sacrifice the life of a perfect stranger's life for that of your cat, with no regard to the fact that the stranger has a family that will miss him, parents that will mourn, possibly children, siblings? None of that matters, simply because you don't know them or their family?


You really and truly don't see how blatantly hypocritical you are being? Really? I can turn this completely around just by swapping the places of the animals and humans. If it's not okay to sacrifice the life of a stranger only because they are important to someone else (and not as elinda is arguing, because they have inherently more worth or something) then it is also not okay to sacrifice MY cat for YOUR loved ones.


I'm not sure I agree that it's hypocritical at all, really, but even if it is, I don't really care. It's basic common sense, in my opinion. My mother is worth more than your cat ever will be, and to more people. My mother will do things that will greatly impact other's lives in profoundly positive ways, and it will greatly outweigh any positive impact your cat might have in your life.

Of course, you can pretend there are exceptions to that rule, if you like. You can try to justify it to yourself.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#192 Feb 18 2009 at 3:37 PM Rating: Good
__DEL__1649636418093
View User Forum
Sage
******
30,646 posts
Pensive wrote:
Quote:
And I don't care what you think, shooting someone's child will be hurting people in a much greater way than thier pet.


You'd have to be able to quantify the value we put on other beings. Can you?


I can quantify it to the point that I know that the value of a human being, whether you know them or not, is more than that of your cat.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#193 Feb 18 2009 at 3:39 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1592267273743
Scholar
*****
10,359 posts
Quote:
No, it's not false.


You're really attempting to argue that every single person on the planet is someone's loved one?

Quote:
It's basic common sense, in my opinion.


Well that's a great justification for having an opinion.

I don't have to justify my ethics to myself. I did that a long time ago by thinking about the consistent and logical inferences of my various beliefs.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#194 Feb 18 2009 at 3:40 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1592267273743
Scholar
*****
10,359 posts
Quote:
I can quantify it to the point that I know that the value of a human being, whether you know them or not, is more than that of your cat.


So, you can't at all, instead relying on dogmatic assertions of behavior that most people happen to intuit as correct. Cool.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#195 Feb 18 2009 at 3:44 PM Rating: Excellent
__DEL__1649636418093
View User Forum
Sage
******
30,646 posts
Pensive wrote:
Quote:
No, it's not false.


You're really attempting to argue that every single person on the planet is someone's loved one?


Sure. Why not? You can't disprove it any more than I can prove it.

Pensive wrote:
Quote:
It's basic common sense, in my opinion.


Well that's a great justification for having an opinion.

I don't have to justify my ethics to myself. I did that a long time ago by thinking about the consistent and logical inferences of my various beliefs.


Seeing you talk about "justification" makes me giggle, honestly.

Pensive wrote:
Belkira wrote:
I can quantify it to the point that I know that the value of a human being, whether you know them or not, is more than that of your cat.
So, you can't at all, instead relying on dogmatic assertions of behavior that most people happen to intuit as correct. Cool.


You can call it whatever you want. A human has more value to this world, and to other people, than your cat can or ever will. I'm sorry if my saying that makes you so angry or sad or whatever it is that made you come back and argue it and try to insult me, but that's not really going to change anything.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#196 Feb 18 2009 at 3:46 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1592267273743
Scholar
*****
10,359 posts
Quote:
Sure. Why not? You can't disprove it any more than I can prove it.


Easy
Homeless war veteran whose entire family is dead and has no friends but the pigeons. I know several of them personally, and while I freely give them money, I wouldn't notice if they weren't in woodruff park tomorrow.

Quote:
I'm sorry if my saying that makes you so angry or sad or whatever it is that made you come back and argue it and try to insult me, but that's not really going to change anything.


Not insulting you, in fact I'm laughing. Its funny to me see, because I'm not trying to make you do anything that you find morally repugnant. I'm not telling you how to behave, and I'm not telling you that pets have more value than human life. I'm not even saying that compassion is a bad thing, far from it. Compassion is one of the greatest virtues a human can cultivate.

What I will defend, however, is that these values are entirely invented by humans, and I'm going to accept the consequences of that, whether that gives me a god complex or not.

Edited, Feb 18th 2009 6:48pm by Pensive
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#197 Feb 18 2009 at 4:14 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1630282721753
View User Forum
Sage
*****
14,174 posts
Quote:
Sure. Why not? You can't disprove it any more than I can prove it.


Untrue. It's much easier for him to prove it, as he needs only to find one exception whereas you would need to prove all 6+ billion people have someone who loves them.

I would just like to say that I don't exactly agree with Pensive or you.

Edited, Feb 18th 2009 7:15pm by Kavekk
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#198 Feb 18 2009 at 4:50 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1592267273743
Scholar
*****
10,359 posts
Likes I said, you're a tricksy moderate.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#199 Feb 18 2009 at 5:35 PM Rating: Default
__DEL__1599438114376
View User Forum
***
3,967 posts
Not sure if anyone posted this yet.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#200 Feb 18 2009 at 10:05 PM Rating: Good
Omegavegeta
View User Forum
Sage
****
8,236 posts
This thread stopped being about Kenny 3 pages ago.

/humph
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#201 Feb 19 2009 at 11:46 AM Rating: Good
RedPhoenixxx
View User Forum
Sage
****
7,735 posts
Ernesto and I both agree on this one.

____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
▲ Page top
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 346 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (346)
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC