Is it rhubarb pie?
Rhubarb torture. Death by rhubarb. “Dude, you’ve been 'barbed!”.
Hmm. Pie or torture, cake or death…
Always choose the baked goods, say I.
Be a torture supporting hypocritical douchbag,
Hey degenerate offspring of a desperate whore. Maybe in pretend lawyer school they didn’t cover history, but at one point we had things like slavery, and all manor of bad thing. Domestic violence was okay. Rape probably the woman’s fault. Natives were killed, ethnic cleansed, and the like.
You find nothing wrong with times? Was it okay because their group, not yours? It was the popular action of a voting public (nonwhites, and females need not apply)
Also your morality is the very reason people find hypocrites such as yourself lower then septic tank scum.
You have a very selfish form of cowardice. “water board the arab children! Threaten to gang rape 15 year olds! but oh noes don’t do that to me!” You’re a fucking pussy. You’re a brute and a coward.
Let me ask you this. Do you feel the slightest bit of guilt that you’re supporting a 15 year old child being tortured with water boarding, and threatened with being raped to death?
Let me ask you this. Now I know you wouldn’t do such a thing, but let’s say you and your neighbor (a nice shirt off his back if need it kinda of guy) are competing for some job. One night you sneak over, cut the tag on his electric meter, and make it look like he tempered with it to get free electric.
You turn him, he goes to jail losing everything he ever worked for, and you get the job.
Would you feel guilty for your actions, worse then not getting the job you preferred?
If so that’s why morality is more then a preference. If not you’re an antipersonnel disorder, and the mods need to report your IP to CPS, for your child’s sake.
TTR, you should spend more time trying to understand what I’m saying instead of frothing at the mouth, spinning stupid-ass hypos, and calling my a hypocrite.
Your bullshit is not worthy of a response. I will respond if you flesh out your questions a little better and/or actually attempt to demonstrate why I am a hypocrite.
Actually, hypocrite would be a step up from amoral nihilist.
But no one asked you. Call it ballroom dancing if you like, you still support torture. That you try to pretend it isn’t torture doesn’t actually change the nature of the offensive right-wing policy in question, it just makes you a dishonest torture apologist.
Ok, got it–if I disagree with you about something, then I am being doshonest. But you disagree with me, so I suppose that makes you dishonest as well.
Actually I found this whole discussion really rather enlightening. Previously I found you to be jaw droppingly reprehensible and wondered how anyone could possibly be such a vile human being. Now I actually think I understand where your are coming from. If I understand you correctly, you are advocating a utilitarian morality, in which, moral actions are those which best advance the “Good”. In this case the “Good” is your own personal self interest. Thus any action which promotes your self interest is good, and any action which does not promote your self interest is bad. So if you were a sadist (which I have no reason to believe you are), then your torturing someone would be moral, because it gives you pleasure. However if someone tortures you, it would by definition be immoral because it acted against your pleasure.
Have I got this right?
I still think you are a vile human being and feel sorry for your children, but at least I’m no longer quite so baffled by your stances.
Well, you are you, and we are we. We say you’re an amoral scumbag, so that is absolutely correct from our point of view. You can be free to think whatever you like.
A philosophy that can simply be boiled down to “I am an island, and whatever I think is moral is therefore moral” and “whatever anyone else thinks is moral is irrelevant, because they are not me”
Is, as elucidator points out, simply amoral nihilism, and is simply worthless.
I really struggle to understand why Rand’s somewhat half-assed emotivism is triggering so much rage. Plenty of great philosophers argue about the truth content of ethical propositions all the time. BFD. That doesn’t make the propositions we collectively accept any less binding.
Of all of Rand Rover’s somewhat self-serving beliefs, this one is probably the least controversial.
Maeglin, why is my emotivism “half-assed,” exactly?
Nope.
I dunno… I figure either troll who is amused by the reaction he gets, and/or just an unexceptional self-centered jerk, of which the world has plenty. Neither is particularly jaw-dropping or unusual.
Bryan, what about option ©: neither you nor Buck has the mental horsepower to understand what I’m talking about (which is actually quite simple and non-controversial, as Maeglin has pointed out)?
Conceivable, but far less likely than either of the two options I suggested, neither of which is especially complex.
OK. Why don’t you (and Buck) go read Wikipedia’s entry on emotivism, then read my first two or three posts in this thread, then see what you think. Thanks.
OK, so enlighten me. What did I get wrong? I am seriously interested. Just because I don’t agree with your viewpoint doesn’t mean that I am not interested in understanding it.
Oh, I don’t care about your feelings on general morality. Heck, I’m an atheist who long-ago abandoned the notion of an absolute moral standard. My question in post #100 was to elicit something I could throw back at you the next time you said something along the lines of liberals being immoral or something, but that seems pointless now. It’s your notion that waterboarding isn’t torture because:
- “We” did it.
- It was meticulously planned out.
- A judge didn’t say it was torture.
… that pegs you as a troll or a jerk, or at the very least someone who has not bothered to learn how waterboarding works.