Originally posted by Capt Spaulding
It's remarkable that you think like this, but there's always a reason for someone to think...unemotionally....i won't prod for details, but to think so machine-like must have had some background for you to lose such a sense of morality.
I don't lack a sense of morality. Nothing I've said has even implied that. It is possible to talk about something detached from one's personal feelings or beliefs you know.
Originally posted by Symmetric ChaosNot really. Evolution is a constant process. By making our lives easier in certain aspects it gives us a chance to find other ways to better ourselves.
Making life hard is what leads to evolution 😐
Compare now to the times of the black plauge. When was our species as a whole more fit? Back then with the shorter lifespans when we were smaller, or now with stronger, larger specimins who also live longer?
Originally posted by Symmetric ChaosWhen did I say that you said that.
When did I say that the fittest shouldn't reproduce?
I said that by not reproducing then the "fittest" (although mentally more ill) have not perpetuated the species.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I don't lack a sense of morality. Nothing I've said has even implied that. It is possible to talk about something detached from one's personal feelings or beliefs you know.
more cases than not, one would declare that before hand, otherwise I'd be forced to take such statements as literal as possible.
Originally posted by Symmetric ChaosIt's not like serial killers are a seperate species, race or anything.
Then I guess serial killers would be bred out. Who can say no to that?
You can't "breed out" serial killers. Some people become serial killers after they've reproduced. Quite a few of them never reproduced, such as bundy, Gacy or dahmer.
Originally posted by Master-Borg
Abe Lincoln and JFK were both assassinated. Guess they weren't 'fit' enough to benefit humankind....what with their weird ideologies of ending slavery and pushing for human travel to the moon and such.
Originally posted by Battlehammer
good point
😛
Originally posted by Creshosk
No, just that we're hypocrites for judging yours but we can't judge yours while you judge ours.That's called being an accessory. 🙂
Just mirroring you. 🙂
Yes because protecting people isn't in the iterest of the greater good.
No hypocrites because if you want to question why I don't want to kill someone with this idea of indirectly being the cause of other people's lives then you are hypocritical because you do not go around killing murderers.
I can take a belief just fine but when you try and pawn it off on me like you actually know I should be held responsible for what a person does then you for not killing murderers are a hypocrite if it is so factual.
I mean literally I guess every person that dies in this world at the hands of a convicted felon we should all be guilty for right 🙂
So when a Doctor saves a convicted felon he just became an accessory to murder nice try bad logic 🙂
Yes protecting people in danger is good but trying to proclaim that by letting someone live I am responsible for what they person does in the future not really.
Like I said apparently Doctors should just not treat some people 🙂
are we thinking real world logic?Casue if in our world there were mass killers like the Joker Then they wouldn't escape the death penalty in the first place.
But as for heroes thinking that Killing is what separates them from the villians...meh,Mr Todd phrased it best when talking with Batman,hell that was a good talk all around on the subject.
Originally posted by Martian_mindWe are supposed to be thinking of it as a this is a comic book style world with Super powers and all that.
are we thinking real world logic?Casue if in our world there were mass killers like the Joker Then they wouldn't escape the death penalty in the first place.But as for heroes thinking that Killing is what separates them from the villians...meh,Mr Todd phrased it best when talking with Batman,hell that was a good talk all around on the subject.
And in such a world would we as the heroes kill said Supervillians.
Originally posted by Newjak
We are supposed to be thinking of it as a this is a comic book style world with Super powers and all that.And in such a world would we as the heroes kill said Supervillians.
Depends on the villian.
If they murder someone in a country that beleives in the death penalty,and the murder was either for money/power/enjoyment i'd snap their neck right there.
If said country didn't have a death penalty then of course due process will be necessary.
and if they are unable to be contained or held up by the justice system...then yeah,i'm snapping the neck again.
I'd have no moral conflict,i'd just think using a legal point,thatr the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few...or in this case,the lives of the many.
Originally posted by willRules
I'm pretty sure this thread has been done before, anyway....Totally against it, pretty much for the reasons Digi said and the influence of my own Christian Morality ✅ As Christian Bale said in Batman begins, when asked why he didn't kill;
"That's what separates us from them."
Im not saying that people should go around killing people either but to an extent Batmas argument is illogical. Were not like them because we kill but he beats people up instead, so what about criminal that prefer to beat up people then not kill? According to his logic batman is as bad as the criminals mentioned.
As for Christian morality some of it doesnt seem to be applied practically to the real world such as turning the other cheek.