Originally posted by xmarksthespot
You said that someone willing to die to protect the life of another is a wholly "good" act.
I gave the example of people willing to die for what most any one with common sense would call an evil man - the Schutzstaffel - to show that the wholly "good" act is as subjective as anything else.
Well like I said good and evil can only be defined to a degree, everything is relative. Going by common sense if somone gave up their life for somone else following a 'good' ideal then they are 'good', the ss werent following a very 'good' ideal were they? Still an ideal can be only be defined as good to an extent like I said so yeah your point is debateable...I dislike arguing points like these being that the greatest minds of all time havent given us a satisfying and absolute definition of good and evil yet; I dont think were going to find the answer.
osama is very evil and wants nothing but bad things to happen to the US. the powers that be saw this and allowed him to carry out the attacks of 9/11. he might not of even been involved at all.
as for bush, well i think its clear to everyone now that he is just a puppet controled from behind the scenes. whateva happens isnt his doing. even though i do think bush as a sick mind anyway, its a feleing i get when i look at him
Originally posted by Great Vengeanceevil cant really be defined no more than a virus can be diefined to a particular structure. to put it simple evil only exist in other people, its a flaw, but it dosent exist by itself, its there as a corrupting measure, if you will, like rot in a tree or rust on a car.
Yeah your right, every man thinks what hes doing is right... 😕And about evil, yes its a very subjective concept but it can be defined to a degree. For instance giving your life to save somone else is 'good'...perhaps good can be defined as going against your natural tendencies for an ideal that by our standards is 'right'. Evil in contrast could be defined as succumbing to natures flaws, anger, hate, pride etc.
as for whos evil. Bush isnt a bad man, he dosent know what hes doing, but he is not bad, there are alot of scandals and hidden conspiracies surrounding him, but that has been around since the spanish american war, so you cant really blame him, besides, he has no more power then congress, not the people, congress give him. our government is corrupt but it isnt all bush. i have to go with Osama, he and his followers have been planning this forever, they had "conventions" preaching a jihad or holy war against us in our own country, funny how freedom of speech can work against you.
Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
I concider the earth to be "alive", just as much as a tree... yes I probably can be proved wrong... but the earth acts in a way to keep a natural balance... just like the rest of nature...
So when you say earth you mean the Eco System? ...yeah well you are right we rape that one up and down.....
Osama Bin Laden has been dead sense October of 2001. How many times does SpellJammer have to say this?
He was all talk. He was a second-rate terrorist who had no real agenda, he was a barbarian, and a mindless twit just trying to extract revenge on those who opposed the harsh rules of the Taliban. (And considering all the hectic rules, it's no wonder they were named TaliBAN.)
Where as George Bush is courageous America Hero, forced to comply to the evil goverment he works for. Bush is not to blame, but the secret faces who control our country. He's like some holy knight, blackmailed into doing what the overlord says or something really bad will happen..
So out of those two options, SpellJammer will say Osama. Though his threat level may be considerably lower considering he had to brain to backup his intent..