If someone bad dies..do they derserve...

[sun]

If someone bad dies, do they deserve respect?
So, the dead should lie in peace, does that always hold true? Why or why not.
And how would you define the idea of "bad" or "evil"?

Something to think about. What do you think?

[Shawn Hopkins]

Not really, except an acknowledgment that whatever their flaws are, they are still a human being. But they don't deserve all the fake sympathy and insincere "respect for the dead" messages that the Internet is clogged with.

After someone's death is the only time you can give a full accounting of their life. Whatever that tally is, that's the way they should be remembered. If bad outweighs the good, don't be afraid to say so.

Maybe it's in poor taste to say nasty stuff before someone's in the ground, but being dead does not automatically absolve everyone's sins or undo the damage they've done.

I won't mourn the BTK killer, for instance, except in a general "brotherhood of man" way.

[Storm Eagle]

I would just have regret for them that they didn't know the right path to take.




I won't mourn the BTK killer, for instance, except in a general "brotherhood of man" way.

"Brotherhood of man"?

[Shawn Hopkins]

I would just have regret for them that they didn't know the right path to take.



"Brotherhood of man"?

Please don't tell me you're so cynical you don't believe in the brotherhood of man.

John Donne says it best:

"No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend’s or of thine own were: any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee."

[GWOtaku]

Okay...there's "someone bad" as in someone you happen to dislike or disagree with, and "someone bad" as in someone who is truly and clearly evil based on his reprehensible actions. Calling out the latter is fine, that's based on fact that would be disingenuous to ignore. That said to be frank I have seen the two disturbingly and wrongly fused together as if they're the same thing, and I don't think much of that at all.

I also don't respect the "I don't have to show false sympathy" line. You don't have to say anything about the dead if you have nothing worthwhile to express besides contempt or even hate. Period. Unfortunately decency of this sort is too often lost on the internet, where anything can be said within seconds with complete anonymity and no accountability at all.

[purplehairedwonder]

I also don't respect the "I don't have to show false sympathy" line. You don't have to say anything about the dead if you have nothing worthwhile to express besides contempt or even hate. Period. Unfortunately decency of this sort is too often lost on the internet, where anything can be said within seconds with complete anonymity and no accountability at all.Agreed. If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all, kthx. Whether you liked or disliked the person, they were still a human being and there are very few people I would just wish to die. Someone is going to be hurt by the loss, so have some respect for them at the very least. But most of all, keep the snide comments to yourself. I don't care if you think like that, but I don't need to hear it.

[tb4000]

People argue the "if you can't say something nice, don't say anything" statement with, "it's a free country, I can express my opinion." Usually people say things they know will get a rise, and for no other reason than that.

[Desensitized]

Well, I won't go up to their families and laugh at them or anything, but if they didn't have my respect in life then they ain't getting it in death.

But I don't attack the dead, they can't exactly fight back or anything.

[Storm Eagle]

Please don't tell me you're so cynical you don't believe in the brotherhood of man.

John Donne says it best:

"No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend’s or of thine own were: any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee."

It's more a matter of ignorance than cynicism. I was just wondering if you were saying what I thought you were trying to say. Like, us men have to stick together. Stuff like that.

[sun]

A truly bad person doesn't deserve any praise, or even talk that he is part of the brotherhood of man.

Two rather old examples are:

Jeffrey Dahmer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Dahmer) - Milwaukee cannibal, who kept body parts in his apartment...(caught in l991, died in prison, as a result of an attack by another prisoner)

John Wayne Gacy ..Known as the "clown",,.killed 33 victims and buried them underneath his house.. Chicago...(Caught in l978, executed in 1991, lethal injection.).

Both of these serial killers are in my opinion, not worthy of the term human. No kind words, or nice ideas about the "brotherhood of man"

More important, we need to find out why, to keep these unspeakable acts, and people like this from acting like this again.

[Frank Castle]

If a person was a piece of crap human being, they don't deserve any form of respect whatsoever. You can say all you want that they were still human beings, but if they didn't deserve to get any respect while they were living, they damn sure don't deserve any respect when they're dead.

[Harvey Two Face]

I guess it depends how the individual holds their opinion on the afterlife, for example, the egyptions held death at very high importance no matter who dies.

[J'onn J'onzz]

I agree with sun. Brutal mass murderers DO deserve to die. It's not like ANYONE is going to be sad that some cannibalistic madman is dead.

As for the whole Falwell thing, I found the man offensive, disgusting, and a horrible, hateful person. I mean, he referred to the civil rights movement as "the civil wrongs movement". I can't respect someone like that's death. It's like respecting a KKK member dying. They may be dead, and their wife may be sad or whatever, but in my opinion, they were still a horrible human being. I didn't like Saddam's death, because it only lead to more murders in Iraq. But no innocents are going to die because some homophobic preacher is dead. If he had done more good in his life, I'd respect his death. But I can't respect someone who blames homosexuals for 9/11. Sorry.

I don't understand why we should be any nicer to the dead than to the living. Just because they aren't alive anymore doesn't make them any better of a person.

[sun]

Please, the Fawell thing is over. Let that one go, or we will not be able to discuss this.

It is a much larger issue. As Sub-Zero pointed out. "If a person is a piece of crap, they don't deserve any form of respect."

Humans have an incredible capacity for evil. I do not understand it other than asking "why?"

But I know much of the why. I guess I am just agreeing with Sub. If deep down, we feel they really hurt someone, (and that I guess is on some level personal,) we can feel whatever we want.

There are no rules that he died, and deserves respect. After all, he is dead. If he/she is someone who earns our respect, but that is another thing. These ideas are our most personal beliefs. As long as we do not force others to believe them, and also, as long as we do not hurt people with our beliefs, I think it is ok to believe what we want on subjects like this. sun

[Gatomon41]

All humans, wither or not they're good or evil, should be given their diginity.

An evil man would not do that for his fellow people. A good man would do this regardless of what anyone has done.

[Kury Wagner]

All humans, wither or not they're good or evil, should be given their diginity.
For once, Gatomon and I agree on something. In my opinion, who a person was, whatever they had done in their life, is regardless when it comes to death. You become worse than a murderer when you laugh or smile at someone's death. You should always respect a fellow being, and respect their passing.

[Shawn Hopkins]

It's more a matter of ignorance than cynicism. I was just wondering if you were saying what I thought you were trying to say. Like, us men have to stick together. Stuff like that.

You're right, except its not just "men" but all human kind, including women.


For once, Gatomon and I agree on something. In my opinion, who a person was, whatever they had done in their life, is regardless when it comes to death. You become worse than a murderer when you laugh or smile at someone's death. You should always respect a fellow being, and respect their passing.

Really? Being happy that someone bad died is worse than murder? How do you reckon that? Which one causes more harm?

Respect is earned, as is disrespect. Dying doesn't magically absolve people of anything. And everybody dies, so it's not like they did something special or suffered more than anyone else in way that would earn back lost respect.
Nor does it fix the problems people like Falwell have created in our society or bring people like Gacy's victims back to life.

"The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones."

Shakespeare, from Julius Caesar

[Tay the Cat]

For once, Gatomon and I agree on something. In my opinion, who a person was, whatever they had done in their life, is regardless when it comes to death. You become worse than a murderer when you laugh or smile at someone's death. You should always respect a fellow being, and respect their passing.
I agree with both of you.

And it's funny that sun mentioned Gacy. There's a song about him that I like, by Sufjan Stevens. It tells about Gacy's life growing up and through his killing spree and death. What really gets to me though, is the last stanza:


And in my best behavior
I am really just like him.
Look beneath the floor boards
For the secrets I have hid.
I realize the very last line is a metaphor, but the first line is the truth. We really are just like Gacy, whether what we've done is major or not.

Maybe it's just the Christian in me kicking in, but the way I see it, is that we're all equal under the eyes of God.
That's how MLK and Nelson Mandela saw things as well.

[Gatomon41]

Respect is earned, as is disrespect.

I'm talking about intrinsic diginity, not giving people external honor. There's a difference.


Dying doesn't magically absolve people of anything. And everybody dies, so it's not like they did something special or suffered more than anyone else in way that would earn back lost respect.
They were also people. No matter what they did, they should at least be seen as people, even as vile or corrupt.


Nor does it fix the problems people like Falwell have created in our society or bring people like Gacy's victims back to life.
So what? How is that relevant to recongizing a person's diginity? Sure, if the person dies, and if created a grave wrong, then theres justice. However, even if the person was evil, it does not give us the right to take away his humanity.


"The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones."

Shakespeare, from Julius Caesar

"Love means loving the unlovable - or it is no virtue at all." -
G.K. Chesterton, Heretics, 1905

[Shawn Hopkins]

I'm talking about intrinsic diginity, not giving people external honor. There's a difference.


They were also people. No matter what they did, they should at least be seen as people, even as vile or corrupt.


So what? How is that relevant to recongizing a person's diginity? Sure, if the person dies, and if created a grave wrong, then theres justice. However, even if the person was evil, it does not give us the right to take away his humanity.



"Love means loving the unlovable - or it is no virtue at all." -
G.K. Chesterton, Heretics, 1905

All right, I agree with you. In fact, I've even said it earlier in the thread. We all should recognize the basic, baseline humanity of other people, even bad people.

My view that one should acknowledge that all humans are human doesn't mean I feel obligated to say nice things or even keep my mouth shut about the bad things I feel about a person just because they're dead, though. History will remember them for the jerks they were.

And everybody dies. Falwell was in his 70s, rich and powerful. It's not like some awful, unfortunate thing happened to him.

[Storm Eagle]

You're right, except its not just "men" but all human kind, including women.




Yeah exactly. Though there are similar codes by men for men, and by women for women. So that's what came to my mind when you mentioned the "brotherhood of man". Sick though.

[SirLemming]

While it makes sense to be happy that an evil person is dead, I think we're called to take the more difficult route and rise above that instinct, and give every human being respect. Not false respect; if it's false, don't bother. Even in those cases where someone is better off dead, I still find that being happy about it eats away at my own goodness a little bit. And I think that once you start deciding who deserves to die and who doesn't, you get into some very dangerous territory.

[sun]

While it makes sense to be happy that an evil person is dead, I think we're called to take the more difficult route and rise above that instinct, and give every human being respect. Not false respect; if it's false, don't bother. Even in those cases where someone is better off dead, I still find that being happy about it eats away at my own goodness a little bit. And I think that once you start deciding who deserves to die and who doesn't, you get into some very dangerous territory.

While we may need to raise above that instinct, it is a tough haul. Imagine if you can, a killerdog has somehow escaped and mauled and killed your only child. You cannot have any more children, and this child was truly a great person.

Now, we should we feel sorry for the dog, if it is destroyed? Or perhaps the owner who trained the dog to kill? Or who? Oh, it was just a dog, it didn't know any better. Perhaps.

But we think that people know better. Some know only hatred and selfishness. These people do not think like us. So, the only way I could possibly feel for that person, is in my mind, take away that person's face, and somehow just think of a human who has failed at being a human. It is another lost human. Nothing more.

For if we start to think of that individual person, then we lose. That person had choices, and we know what they are. I cannot feel anything for someone who kills for no other than the joy of killing. It is almost as if that person is not human. ........................................sun.

[Storm Eagle]

But we think that people know better. Some know only hatred and selfishness. These people do not think like us.

Or they're just men who carry that extra Y chromosome?

[tb4000]

Have you ever gone violent on someone and then felt bad about it afterwards? Maybe you deserve the same fate to fall on you. Or maybe you don't.

[GregX]

Evil people don't deserve respect when they die. They don't even deserve a burial. Throw their corpse to the dogs. That's what they deserve.

And no, I'm not saying this to get a rise out of anyone. I sincerely believe that.

[Tay the Cat]

Evil people don't deserve respect when they die. They don't even deserve a burial. Throw their corpse to the dogs. That's what they deserve.

And no, I'm not saying this to get a rise out of anyone. I sincerely believe that.

This makes you no better than the people you call evil.

And yes, I sincerely believe that.

[GregX]

This makes you no better than the people you call evil.

And yes, I sincerely believe that.

Oh, I'm pretty sure I'm better than Hitler, Stalin, bin Laden, Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacey, Scott Peterson, and other terrible people.

[Ajax]

See theres a problem with this...were feaking human. If someone murders my brother you sure as hell can believe im gonna be smiling when I see that bastards grave. Its only natural. Its very simple to sit there and say "All humans, wither or not they're good or evil, should be given their diginity" when evil things havent been done to you. While i do not disagree with that quote, the only persons opinion in this matter that i would respect is a person who has had something horrible happen to them and then have them say "yes that person was a part of the Brotherhood of man".

[Tay the Cat]

Oh, I'm pretty sure I'm better than Hitler, Stalin, bin Laden, Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacey, Scott Peterson, and other terrible people.

Not really.

No human being is better than anyone, like it or not.

[GregX]

Not really.

No human being is better than anyone, like it or not.

I am better simply by the virtue that I have never committed genocide, flew hijacked planes into populated skyscapers, or murdered anyone.

I need to know, where do you come up with this stuff? Because, to me, it seems naive at best.

Again, this is just my opinion. My outlook on life. But I have seen evil, real evil. It sounds to me like you have not, and I envy you for that.

[Pupmon 4.0]

I believe that the underlying problem here is the terms "good" and "bad". Who is to say whether a person is "bad" or "good"? As someone has stated earlier, when we start saying who deserves to live and/or die, we enter into a very shady area.



Oh, I'm pretty sure I'm better than Hitler, Stalin, bin Laden, Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacey, Scott Peterson, and other terrible people.


You can say that now, however, you have just as much potiental as they did to commit such great errors.

[Frank Castle]

To expand upon my first post, I don't think we owe any evil human respect, but I strongly believe that we should find out why they did the things they did. Once we learn of their mistakes, we can make sure not to go down the same dark path they did.

[Kury Wagner]

I have an uneasy feeling about the way this thread is going. This is a tricky subject, and you guys have touched on sub-topics that were already stopped in the Cafe. I'm not going to close this thread, and I see no need for pokes or warnings just yet, but watch what you say.

[EinBebop]

Oh, I'm pretty sure I'm better than Hitler, Stalin, bin Laden, Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacey, Scott Peterson, and other terrible people.Congrats on being in a higher level of hell. ;)

[GregX]

Congrats on being in a higher level of hell. ;)

"Is it noticed that in Heaven all the interesting people are missing?"
- Friedrich Nietzsche ;)

[Desensitized]

Some of these posts are getting a little weird....

I can totally see how some people would be happy when someone horrible dies. Then that person can no longer continue being horrible. That's fine.

I can also see how people would feel sorry for someone who went down the wrong path in life and ended up the way they did. Nothing wrong with that.

We're all different, we all think differently. That's what makes us unique, we can have different views we can share with each other. We all have different reactions to the same events because we're not the same person, and thank God (or whatever you believe in) for that.

That said, if I learned that someone horrible died I probably would be grateful they can no longer keep doing horrible things, but I wouldn't dance on their grave over it.

[Dead_Ninja_111]

For once, Gatomon and I agree on something. In my opinion, who a person was, whatever they had done in their life, is regardless when it comes to death. You become worse than a murderer when you laugh or smile at someone's death. You should always respect a fellow being, and respect their passing.


Like they showed any respect to the people they killed? They just took away the life of someone innocent for their own enjoyment and pleasure.

If a child murder/rappest or woman murder/rappest, or just a straight up killer dies, I'll have the biggest grin on my face. I'll show no respect to such filth.

To anyone who does believe in showing respect to them, just tell me if you still would if they killed the people you loved most in the world...

It's easy to say that you would, but just think of it through the victim's family point of view...

[Gatomon41]

Like they showed any respect to the people they killed? They just took away the life of someone innocent for their own enjoyment and pleasure.
It's either that, or sinking to to their level. To clearify, I am refering to is "intrinstic dignitiy" or as others have put it, people's baseline humanity. We ignore that, then we become as evil as those who commit the crimes.


If a child murder/rappest or woman murder/rappest, or just a straight up killer dies, I'll have the biggest grin on my face. I'll show no respect to such filth.
Justice must be done aginst evildoers, but that filth is still a human.


To anyone who does believe in showing respect to them, just tell me if you still would if they killed the people you loved most in the world...
It will be hard at first. If one lets hate and sadness consume them as to blind their minds and hearts, then they will fall into a madness. It would be better to let time heal the wounds, to grieve, and then recoginze the inherent humanity of the criminal, even if they don't deserve it.


It's easy to say that you would, but just think of it through the victim's family point of view...
Regardless of victicm or observer, it does not change the objective fact.

[Gatomon41]

"Is it noticed that in Heaven all the interesting people are missing?"
- Friedrich Nietzsche ;)
Nietzsche is philosphy's poser. His writings have little philosphial merit as far as I can tell, though it does make for some freaky fiction.

[Dead_Ninja_111]

It's either that, or sinking to to their level. To clearify, I am refering to is "intrinstic dignitiy" or as others have put it, people's baseline humanity. We ignore that, then we become as evil as those who commit the crimes.




I'm not going to go off and kill innocent people. I will in fact do positive things for this world, not showing any respect to the news of a murderer being killed or smiling over it does not make me as evil as them.

That is no where near as evil as taking away a life.

And you're right, that "filth" is still a human, a human that killed someone's sister, brother, mother, father, child, grandparent, best friend, etc.

[Gatomon41]

I'm not going to go off and kill innocent people. I will in fact do positive things for this world, not showing any respect to the news of a murderer being killed or smiling over it does not make me as evil as them.
That's not postive, it's jsut building upon the fires of hate.


That is no where near as evil as taking away a life.
But it still an evil. And lesser evils can lead to greater devils.


And you're right, that "filth" is still a human, a human that killed someone's sister, brother, mother, father, child, grandparent, best friend, etc.
True enoguh, and the evildoer should be punished. But punished with justice, not in hate.

[Gatomon41]

Oh, I'm pretty sure I'm better than Hitler, Stalin, bin Laden, Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacey, Scott Peterson, and other terrible people.
Alot of people are better in compared to these people. It's like saying "I may steal, but at least I'm not with the mafia." Hitler and others like him are not the best standards for goodness in the first place.

[GregX]

Alot of people are better in compared to these people. It's like saying "I may steal, but at least I'm not with the mafia." Hitler and others like him are not the best standards for goodness in the first place.

Oh, I've never said I consider myself to be a good person. Not an evil person, but not a good person.

But, yes, I do think I have the right to judge people. We all do it.

[Cartoon_Kid]

Guy's if you're a christian you would know about how god sent his only son to die for our sins he died for us he forgave us why cant we forgive anyone we dont like dead or alive?

[Frank Castle]

Guy's if you're a christian you would know about how god sent his only son to die for our sins he died for us he forgave us why cant we forgive anyone we dont like dead or alive?
Because we're human. I'm a Christian as well just in case you were wondering.

[Eddie G.]

That's not postive, it's jsut building upon the fires of hate.How does that work though? I agree with you that we must remain just in how we treat these people. At the same time though why should we pretend that our base feelings aren't there. As someone who's had someone he's cared about hurt, I not only wanted the guy dead, but I wanted to kill him. Now, concepts of justice and natural right and my belief in these things stop me from doing that. I believe he should face justice. What I want is for him to die. Obviously what we should do for the sake of society is more important than my selfish wants.

At the same time though I'd rather not be told that I'm wrong for hating the guy and I'd rather not be told that I should feel bad that he's dead. I also don't see how me being pissed off and not really caring about someone dying matters when I still side with what's right and just.

[GregX]

Guy's if you're a christian you would know about how god sent his only son to die for our sins he died for us he forgave us why cant we forgive anyone we dont like dead or alive?

I'm not a Christian. Nor do I have any desire to be one. If it works for you, that's fine.

[sun]

Everyone has a right to define evil. When such a person dies, again we have the right to give that person respect or not. And the argument can go on for ever, as long as that right to believe, hate, or whatever for that person who has died, is not forced upon another person.

We might say there are absolutes. Such as John Wayne Gacy. He killed for nothing. For the pleasure of it. Yet, person "A" might say that he deserves respect since he was human. I would say no.

What counts most, is how we can sleep at night feeling the way we feel. Arguing about it, is very hard. I am not sure we convince anyone. I do hope our thoughts about this are reasonable, and we do not believe we have the only answer. I wish there were a right answer, but after looking at all the posts, I guess it is an individual thing.

[SirLemming]

Like they showed any respect to the people they killed? They just took away the life of someone innocent for their own enjoyment and pleasure.

If a child murder/rappest or woman murder/rappest, or just a straight up killer dies, I'll have the biggest grin on my face. I'll show no respect to such filth.

To anyone who does believe in showing respect to them, just tell me if you still would if they killed the people you loved most in the world...

It's easy to say that you would, but just think of it through the victim's family point of view...

Who ever said it was easy? It's the hardest thing in the world. Yet I think we should still strive for it. I don't think you're a bad person if you rejoice over the death of Osama Bin Laden or someone who killed your sister or something, but I think that overall, it's probably not a good thing.

I just have trouble actually being happy about someone's death. It doesn't undo any of the wrong they've done. It prevents them from doing further wrong, and that is good (and I do support going to extreme measures to ensure this, when absolutely necessary). But even so, a guy still died. And I just don't like that. I view it as more of a "less bad" thing then a "good" thing.

I'm not going to go around to families of murder victims and tell them to "respect" the murderer. But I will encourage it. Yes, it's easier to say that in my position, but more often than not, emotional detachment from a subject gives you a bit of a clearer view of it...

[EinBebop]

Guy's if you're a christian you would know about how god sent his only son to die for our sins he died for us he forgave us why cant we forgive anyone we dont like dead or alive?
Because we're human. I'm a Christian as well just in case you were wondering.It's not easy, but you're called upon to do it anyway.

"And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone, so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses." - Mark 11:25

"Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you." - Ephesians 4:31-32

[Dead_Ninja_111]

Who ever said it was easy? It's the hardest thing in the world. Yet I think we should still strive for it. I don't think you're a bad person if you rejoice over the death of Osama Bin Laden or someone who killed your sister or something, but I think that overall, it's probably not a good thing.

I just have trouble actually being happy about someone's death. It doesn't undo any of the wrong they've done. It prevents them from doing further wrong, and that is good (and I do support going to extreme measures to ensure this, when absolutely necessary). But even so, a guy still died. And I just don't like that. I view it as more of a "less bad" thing then a "good" thing.

I'm not going to go around to families of murder victims and tell them to "respect" the murderer. But I will encourage it. Yes, it's easier to say that in my position, but more often than not, emotional detachment from a subject gives you a bit of a clearer view of it...

Hmmm, you never answered my question, what would you do if someone killed your sister, brother, mother, or father?

I can already see your answer, but still, I don't think it's right for you to encourage something that you yourself have never experienced.

If something like this has happened to you then I'm sorry for hearing that, but really you need to be in their positions before you can ever say something like that to a victim's family.

[Gatomon41]

How does that work though? I agree with you that we must remain just in how we treat these people. At the same time though why should we pretend that our base feelings aren't there.
I'm not saying we should ignore our feelings. I'm saying we shouldn't let those feelings try to take control of us.


. As someone who's had someone he's cared about hurt, I not only wanted the guy dead, but I wanted to kill him.
You see. that's the problem, letting our emotions take control of us. Yes, you have a legitimate reason to be angry. But feelings are not there to justify what are inherently evil actions.



Now, concepts of justice and natural right and my belief in these things stop me from doing that. I believe he should face justice. What I want is for him to die. Obviously what we should do for the sake of society is more important than my selfish wants.

Affrimative.


At the same time though I'd rather not be told that I'm wrong for hating the guy
That's the thing, by allowing yourself to contiusly hate, you never heal the emotional and spiritual woundsinflicted by the wrongdoer in the first place.

However, you should be angry, and there's nothing wrong with that. Anger is the proper reaction. Hate is letting your anger go out of control.


I've never said I consider myself to be a good person. Not an evil person, but not a good person.
All men may have both good and evil within their hearts. However, they do have different ammounts of good and evil. You either do good things in life or evil things in life. You can only devote yourself to one. To believe you are neither shows indifference and ignorance.


But, yes, I do think I have the right to judge people. We all do it. I never mentuioned anything about judging. What I did mention was how you juded yourself in comparison with known vile and undoubtably evil people. It's like saying "I can't run very good, but at least I can run faster than a snail." You set yourself up for low standards then.

[SirLemming]

Hmmm, you never answered my question, what would you do if someone killed your sister, brother, mother, or father?

I can already see your answer, but still, I don't think it's right for you to encourage something that you yourself have never experienced.

If something like this has happened to you then I'm sorry for hearing that, but really you need to be in their positions before you can ever say something like that to a victim's family.
How can I possibly answer that in any meaningful way? We agree that I'll never know what it's like unless it actually happens to me, so given that it hasn't happened to me, any answer I give will be completely useless. All I can give you is my theory, and I did.

As you suggest, I would never preach this stuff to a victim's family. I encourage it in the general sense, and if they were already emotionally moving in that direction I would also encourage that. But I wouldn't say, "You know, you really should forgive the murderer" -- at least, not for a while. I think the desire for revenge could lead to some unhealthy things, at which point the only right thing to do may be to offer my opinion on the matter. But that's usually very far away.

But here's the main objective of what I'm doing, and why I can do it without ever having experienced such a tragedy. I want to think about this now so that I'll be prepared if the unthinkable ever does happen. I don't want to do something I'll regret, and in such a fragile emotional state, I would be in danger of doing so.

That's what principles are for. They're for when it's almost impossible to follow them, but you do it anyway because you don't want to fall apart completely. You can't put a price on experience and how much it helps you to form your principles, but I think they need to be formed when you're in your right mind.
And by the time you've learned something from the death of a loved one, it's always much too late to affect how you react to that death.

[Dead_Ninja_111]

You talk about "revenge" though I have no "revenge" in me when I'm happy to hear a serial killer or rappest just died.

I don't feel any unhappiness or feel unhealthy, as a matter of fact I'm quite happy and it's with that happiness that I do good things that day. There's nothing wrong with not respecting the death of a murderer, as a matter of fact it can be a good thing.

[Kurokawa41]

Well, I think it depends on the degree of how "bad" this person is. Which is all about perspective.

[Dead_Ninja_111]

Well, I think it depends on the degree of how "bad" this person is. Which is all about perspective.


My perspective of bad would be a person who has killed someone else innocent, and a rappest.

Those kinds of people I will refuse to show respect for when they die.

The messed up the lives of someone forever, they did something that can not be taken back, such actions deserve no forgiveness (my opinion!)

[Kurokawa41]

My perspective of bad would be a person who has killed someone else innocent, and a rappest.

Those kinds of people I will refuse to show respect for when they die.

The messed up the lives of someone forever, they did something that can not be taken back, such actions deserve no forgiveness (my opinion!)

I mostly agree. Well... maybe I'm a little more lenient on the "innocent person" thing. Because most people are considered innocent by most, but the way I see it most people are guilty of bad things so I wouldn't really care if they died or I would think they would deserve such a death.

[Dead_Ninja_111]

It's true that everyone is innocent in their own way, though I was just trying to get to say that people who kill other people in self defense are exculded to me. Though now that I think about it people who kill someone else in self defense aren't really consider a murderer... are they?

[Kurokawa41]

It's true that everyone is innocent in their own way, though I was just trying to get to say that people who kill other people in self defense are exculded to me. Though now that I think about it people who kill someone else in self defense aren't really consider a murderer... are they?

All of that is a matter of perspective. The way I see it, most everyone is guilty, not innocent. I think there are a lot of people that deserve to die, maybe that seems twisted, but in my eyes a lot of people have done bad things that the world would be better off without. If someone kills someone in self defense... well, it still can't be forgiven by people on the receiving end. What if the person who was being killed in self defense just ended up making a mistake, like the whole cliched "man robs bank to get money for his poor family" scenario? So either way, it will hurt someone usually.

[Eddie G.]

That's the thing, by allowing yourself to contiusly hate, you never heal the emotional and spiritual woundsinflicted by the wrongdoer in the first place.

However, you should be angry, and there's nothing wrong with that. Anger is the proper reaction. Hate is letting your anger go out of control.If I still let myself be guided by Natural Right and justice then how am I letting me emotions take the best of me?

[Dead_Ninja_111]

If I still let myself be guided by Natural Right and justice then how am I letting me emotions take the best of me?


My thoughts exactly.

[Pupmon 4.0]

For all of those who believe that murderers or "bad" people don't derserve any respect in death (or life for that matter), think about these scenarios:

1.) What if the murderer/"bad" person is someone who is a good friend or close family member? Are they not worthy of respect in death?

2.) What if the person sought(?) forgiveness prior to their death? Should they be forgiven?

3.) What about the mentally ill? (Whether they were "bad", murderous, or otherwise.) Do they deserve respect in death?

[Kagetsu]

I rather like the ways of the Barbarians. For someone like Osama BinLadin, I'd gladly see him fed to pigs. For that guy who buried the little girl alive (I forget the actual case name), a crows cage would best. I've got a short list of people I've already considered defiling their graves when they die. The problem is practicing black magic really screws with your karma. :p

[Dead_Ninja_111]

1.) What if the murderer/"bad" person is someone who is a good friend or close family member? Are they not worthy of respect in death?



That's a bit hard, though I guess it depends on how strong of a family bond or friendship bond you have with the person. Sure the murderer's family will show "respect" but do you really think the victim's family will?



2.) What if the person sought(?) forgiveness prior to their death? Should they be forgiven?


Too late, it's not like spilling a glass of milk and trying to say you're sorry to mom. They killed someone and/or rapped them in horrible ways, if you ask me a killer trying to find forgiveness probably just wants to get out of jail faster or try to make peace with God because they're scared about going to Hell. They did the unthinkable and unimaginable, ruined someone's life forever, we only get 1 life and they screwed that up for someone big time.

My answer: No




3.) What about the mentally ill? (Whether they were "bad", murderous, or otherwise.) Do they deserve respect in death?

Mentally ill? No I still don't feel like showing respect to someone who killed someone else regardless of how "ill" they were.

[Antiyonder]

What if the murderer/"bad" person is someone who is a good friend or close family member? Are they not worthy of respect in death?

It only makes the bad person look worse, since his/her actions will bring shame to the family, and friends. It's simply selfish.

[Dead_Ninja_111]

It only makes the bad person look worse, since his/her actions will bring shame to the family, and friends. It's simply selfish.

Ahh ha. A much better answer than mine.

[Pupmon 4.0]

You all are looking at my questions through the eyes of the third-person party. Try putting yourself in those situations. Honestly, if your mother went out and murdered someone, would you still say the same things as you are saying now?

[Antiyonder]

Honestly, if your mother went out and murdered someone, would you still say the same things as you are saying now?

Forgiveness might come in due time, but I wouldn't be able to look at her with the same respect.

But, it's not impossible though for people to resent their own family altogether.

[Gatomon41]

I rather like the ways of the Barbarians. For someone like Osama BinLadin, I'd gladly see him fed to pigs. For that guy who buried the little girl alive (I forget the actual case name), a crows cage would best. I've got a short list of people I've already considered defiling their graves when they die. The problem is practicing black magic really screws with your karma. :p
Yeah, and we think were so civilized.

To think like a barabrian leads to barbarism. And in true barbarism, there is no reason. And without reason, there can be no civilzation. You would only commit the same mistakes over and over again.

[Gatomon41]

If I still let myself be guided by Natural Right and justice then how am I letting me emotions take the best of me?

Then there should be no trouble. However, if you mistake vengence and irrationalism with Rightousness and Justice, and use it to only justify your means, thats when the trouble begins.

[Cartoon_Kid]

Because we're human. I'm a Christian as well just in case you were wondering.
Well,you can forrgive when theyre dead..

[James]

You all are looking at my questions through the eyes of the third-person party. Try putting yourself in those situations. Honestly, if your mother went out and murdered someone, would you still say the same things as you are saying now?

Pain through tragedy is not rational and it's not fair. Just because we could feel the same one day does not make us hyporcrites. We are fortunate to have clarity of perspective, people grieving - you, me, they, us - do not, and are forced to rely on those with no emotional investment.

We can sympathize with those who suffer without letting it tarnish the job we have to do to keep society in order. The two aren't exclusive.

[Kagetsu]

Yeah, and we think were so civilized.

To think like a barabrian leads to barbarism. And in true barbarism, there is no reason. And without reason, there can be no civilization. You would only commit the same mistakes over and over again.After Barbarian Week on the History channel, they managed their civilizations quite well for their times. If you compare their time with the current turmoil parts of the world there isn't much difference. And ritual "Trial by Combat" gets rid of a lot of lawyer problems.

To curse someone in death, it's going to take a very personal grievance. Just like Mousalini. And more recently to denai Honor Burial of The guy they convicted of the Oklahoma Federal Building bombing. The Mafia still say prayers for people they killed, doesn't make it more civilized.

Purhaps you're thinking "someone who is just not a nice person" rather than evil incarnate? In that case who cares?

[Antiyonder]

Well,you can forgive when theyre dead..

Being a Christian or Mormon or and religion doesn't mean we become sub-gods or above human. We have just as much potential to sin as any non religious individual.

[Gatomon41]

After Barbarian Week on the History channel, they managed their civilizations quite well for their times.
Because the Goths had far worse barbarians on their heels, namely the Huns. Also, at least these barbarians eventually overcame their barbaric urges and became civilized. It took some time though.


If you compare their time with the current turmoil parts of the world there isn't much difference. And ritual "Trial by Combat" gets rid of a lot of lawyer problems.
Except the Trial By Combat tends to have a bias not those who are right, but towards those who are stronger and more able in combat.


To curse someone in death, it's going to take a very personal grievance. Just like Mousalini. And more recently to denai Honor Burial of The guy they convicted of the Oklahoma Federal Building bombing.
Your confusing dignity and honor. McVeigh had served with the military previously, and his actions were dishonorable. It's no wonder why the military refuse to give him an honorable bruial. But at least someone gave him a bruial.


The Mafia still say prayers for people they killed, doesn't make it more civilized.
I was refering to your tastes in punishments more than today's savages.


Purhaps you're thinking "someone who is just not a nice person" rather than evil incarnate?
Oh, I believe that alot of people out there are evil. Many probably will not change their hearts. But I will not deny their dignity as humans, nor will I give into hatred.

[Dead_Ninja_111]

Oh, I believe that alot of people out there are evil. Many probably will not change their hearts. But I will not deny their dignity as humans, nor will I give into hatred.


Dignity??? What kind of dignity do they have after what they've done? People who kill other people because of their race, religion, age, or out of pleasure shouldn't have any dignity in them whatsoever.

Well when someone you love (and let us hope not) is killed by a murderer I guess it's good to know you won't hate them. :shrug:

[Shawn Hopkins]

I was thinking that acknowledging the humanity of a bad person should actually afford them less respect, because we're acknowledging they had free will and they still chose to do bad things.

You keep talking about dignity, and I agree that all folks should get it. But it really should just extend to a humane death if executed and a dignified burial. No torture or crucifixion or hanging a corpse in the street as an example. Probably shouldn't run through the street with their corpse and let people tear pieces off of it.

But if you think giving someone dignity includes keeping your mouth shut and not talking about the bad things they've done after they've died, then you're wrong. That's just dishonesty.

And I agree that hate is bad for a person, although you should at least be able to be happy that the bad person will no longer do bad things, or that justice has been served.

But all this hyperbole is getting out of hand. Being happy that someone bad died is a small sin that does little harm except to the person that is happy about it. It in no way makes you as bad as that person or drags you down to their level, unless the bad thing they did was just being happy that someone died.

[Dead_Ninja_111]

But all this hyperbole is getting out of hand. Being happy that someone bad died is a small sin that does little harm except to the person that is happy about it.


And what little harm could this possibly be?

[tb4000]

Fact of the matter is we are all capable of horrible evil. Most of us can suppress it, but we all think about doing stuff we know we shouldn't and will never do, but we still ponder it. It's that select few that can't suppress it that causes the problems. The fact that so many "normal" people do crazy things proves it.

[Kagetsu]

The question was basically, if a person committing a bad crime should be forgiven after death. Bad is relevant. Wrong me, and I will beat you to death for the next three hours. wring what I want for society, and removal will be enough.

[Gatomon41]

Dignity??? What kind of dignity do they have after what they've done?
Their God-given one, that of being born human. Others call it their baseline humanity. It's the intrinstic qualitiy that all people are people, and have certain alienable qualties, unable to be denied by no one.



People who kill other people because of their race, religion, age, or out of pleasure shouldn't have any dignity in them whatsoever.

YMAke sure to differenate between murder and killing. One can kill to save a life. Murder is to slay without a legttimate reason.

As I said, you can't take someone's dignity. It's a part of being human. To do so would be like trying to rip a vital organ from human.


Well when someone you love (and let us hope not) is killed by a murderer I guess it's good to know you won't hate them. :shrug:
I would nop doubt be angry. But hate is a vice. It perverts and destroys.

[Dead_Ninja_111]

Umm... anger leads to hate. You can't be angry and not hate. :shrug:

[EinBebop]

Umm... anger leads to hate. You can't be angry and not hate. :shrug:Yoda was wrong about that.

[sun]

What if someone
in his lifetime, has made fun of other persons that have died?

..For example, if someone who has passed away, and had a very bad disease, and person "A" says that this person who has passed away was possessed by the devil and will go to the devil, is that the right thing to say?

..The person that had the bad disease, and passed away, made some mistakes, but tried to live a good life after those mistakes. And did so.

But, because of that disease, person "A" keeps right on talking about this fellow that has passed away. ...evil, sick, perverted...etc..

Now. person "A" passes away..do the rest of us owe "A" respect and dignity. After all, person "A" gave none to some of the dead, why should the rest of us, give "A" the decency that he refused to give others??

Think about that one for a while???....................................sun

[GregX]

Umm... anger leads to hate. You can't be angry and not hate. :shrug:

Further proof that George Lucas is an isolated hack who knows nothing.

[GWOtaku]

I find it rather vexing that some folks still don't seem to understand the difference between acknowledging a person's faults and holding them accountable and the inhumane spectacle of rejoicing in the death of another. Please don't go on talking as if respect and dishonesty are somehow irrevocably linked to each other, because they aren't.

[Gatomon41]

Umm... anger leads to hate. You can't be angry and not hate. :shrug:
No, the Jedi are wrong. Anger is a natural emotion. Everyone feels it, and its a great motivator. However, you commit hate by letting the anger control you and not you controling the anger.

[Dead_Ninja_111]

No, the Jedi are wrong. Anger is a natural emotion. Everyone feels it, and its a great motivator. However, you commit hate by letting the anger control you and not you controling the anger.

Yeah, but funny thing is I'm I laugh at someone evil for dying or not showing them respect I don't get this so called "hate"

[Gatomon41]

Yeah, but funny thing is I'm I laugh at someone evil for dying or not showing them respect I don't get this so called "hate"
Some people don't realize their bigotry. An saying is that "The Devil does not show up with horns, but in pleasant forms." People who do evil actions may think they are right.

[Dead_Ninja_111]

Some people don't realize their bigotry. An saying is that "The Devil does not show up with horns, but in pleasant forms." People who do evil actions may think they are right.


That's a really lame excusse. :shrug:

And if they think killing a child, mother, father, daughter, or brother is right, then they deserve no respect at all when they die.

[EinBebop]

Some of the recent posts do raise a question: is 'right and wrong' taught, or is that knowledge an inherent part of our nature?

[Pupmon 4.0]

That's a really lame excusse. :shrug:

And if they think killing a child, mother, father, daughter, or brother is right, then they deserve no respect at all when they die.

Ah yes, however, what about in times of war? Childen, mothers, fathers, daughters, brothers, sisters, numerous other relatives are killed and people find it perfectly acceptable.
Why, we even have war heroes; being celebrated for killing.
Now, are you saying that people who kill in times of war do not deserve any respect either?

[Dead_Ninja_111]

Ah yes, however, what about in times of war? Childen, mothers, fathers, daughters, brothers, sisters, numerous other relatives are killed and people find it perfectly acceptable.
Why, we even have war heroes; being celebrated for killing.
Now, are you saying that people who kill in times of war do not deserve any respect either?


Our soliders do deserve respect because they were fighting for our freedom. You and I wouldn't be here if those people did not exist and fought bravely to make out lives a better place.

War is an acceptable thing, while going into someone's house and murdering a family is not (not in any way war related that is).

[tb4000]

Our soliders do deserve respect because they were fighting for our freedom. You and I wouldn't be here if those people did not exist and fought bravely to make out lives a better place.

War is an acceptable thing, while going into someone's house and murdering a family is not (not in any way war related that is).
A soldier kills a child because he thinks they were packing, I'm still branding him a murderer, I don't care. A child is a child.

[GregX]

A soldier kills a child because he thinks they were packing, I'm still branding him a murderer, I don't care. A child is a child.

And what if that child is packing? Soldiers have to defend themselves also. War is Hell. It's a sad fact, but it's a fact.

Is a police officer who fires on a kid a murderer if that kid points a gun?

[sun]

A soldier kills a child because he thinks they were packing, I'm still branding him a murderer, I don't care. A child is a child.

In Viet Nam, more than 40 years ago, there are many stories about women carrying bundles, and the soldiers, (our soldiers) thinking that those bundles were bombs, and shooting the woman and her bundle in the back.

Now those bundles were babies.. Viet Nam Vets rarely talk about the horrors of war...some do, many don't...

So, are our soldiers murderers, and deserve, to be labeled "bad" when they die? ..
.. You may not believe this, ok, look it up. It is here on the net. One soldier said, "I was told by my superiors to expect that the Viet Cong would use that trick. Better to shoot first, then worry about the results. "

Now, you know why war is to be avoided.

[Frank Castle]

In Viet Nam, more than 40 years ago, there are many stories about women carrying bundles, and the soldiers, (our soldiers) thinking that those bundles were bombs, and shooting the woman and her bundle in the back.

Now those bundles were babies.. Viet Nam Vets rarely talk about the horrors of war...some do, many don't...

So, are our soldiers murderers, and deserve, to be labeled "bad" when they die? ..
.. You may not believe this, ok, look it up. It is here on the net. One soldier said, "I was told by my superiors to expect that the Viet Cong would use that trick. Better to shoot first, then worry about the results. "

Now, you know why war is to be avoided.
Unfortunately innocent blood is always spilled in war. I don't blame our soldiers for trying to survive. We truly cannot know what was going through their heads when they see someone suspicious whether it be a woman carrying a bundle or a kid who looks to have a gun. The enemy that our soldiers face are cowardly and use heartless tactics to spread their message of hate and death.

Yes innocent casualties are absolutely horrible, but that's the price we pay for living in a sinful world.

[Kurokawa41]

Right and wrong is entirely a matter of perspective. This aspect is crucial and no one seems to understand that. There is no set right and wrong. What is right and wrong is for an individual to determine.

[Gatomon41]

Right and wrong is entirely a matter of perspective. This aspect is crucial and no one seems to understand that. There is no set right and wrong. What is right and wrong is for an individual to determine.

No, there is a right and a wrong action which is determined by an outside force. An indvidual human does not create morality. If a person has morals decides the actions a person makes.

[Gatomon41]

That's a really lame excusse. :shrug:
I was refering to your own comments:

Yeah, but funny thing is I'm I laugh at someone evil for dying or not showing them respect I don't get this so called "hate"

[GregX]

No, there is a right and a wrong action which is determined by an outside force. An indvidual human does not create morality. If a person has morals decides the actions a person makes.

Different people have different morals. What outside force? God? I don't believe in God... or if there is a God, he/she/it is an absentee landlord who doesn't care, or is much like Eric Cartman and is a spoiled brat who cares only about its own amusement.

[GWOtaku]

posted by XTAP:

Right and wrong is entirely a matter of perspective. This aspect is crucial and no one seems to understand that. There is no set right and wrong. What is right and wrong is for an individual to determine.

Mere words, relativism is a delusion. If everyone lived by that creed, society would amount to nothing more than total anarchy. Anyone can believe what they want to, but civilization is built on the foundation of value judgments whether one chooses to acknowledge it or not.

[Gatomon41]

Different people have different morals.
No, different people can choose to follow morals or not. Note, I use the term "morals", not ethics, taboos, or other social rules. What I am refering to is the morals all humans, regardless of culture or nationality, are under.


What outside force? God? I don't believe in God...
What you believe (or for that matter some 19th century poser believed) is rather irrelevant. What matters is what is there.


or if there is a God, he/she/it is an absentee landlord who doesn't care, or is much like Eric Cartman and is a spoiled brat who cares only about its own amusement.
Other evidence shows otherwise, for me example.
You see, there s a price God allowed for humanity to have freedom. Human beings have the option to commit evil. Why? Because, if we were not given the choice between good and evil, we be nothing but robots. We would be lifeless. However, God gave us the ability to make the choice freely, without interference.

However, all opitions have consquences and the moral laws, like the physical, have their own. By choosing evil, one destroys oneself.

[Kurokawa41]

Mere words, relativism is a delusion. If everyone lived by that creed, society would amount to nothing more than total anarchy. Anyone can believe what they want to, but civilization is built on the foundation of value judgments whether one chooses to acknowledge it or not.


Society is only founded on the fact that religions and things have grouped people to have similar morals, and these majorities have taken over. Not to say that's necessarily bad, because things are kept in order, but that is the only reason why society exists.

[Gatomon41]

Society is only founded on the fact that religions and things have grouped people to have similar morals, and these majorities have taken over. Not to say that's necessarily bad, because things are kept in order, but that is the only reason why society exists.
So I guess my archology and history professors were wrong about all the other reasons of how societies developed...:rolleyes:

[Kurokawa41]

So I guess my archology and history professors were wrong about all the other reasons of how societies developed...:rolleyes:

Maybe I used the wrong term. By society I mean the rules and laws of society; what is considered right and wrong by the law.

[Dead_Ninja_111]

I was refering to your own comments:




Yeah how were you refering to it? I can't really see.

[James]

No, different people can choose to follow morals or not. Note, I use the term "morals", not ethics, taboos, or other social rules. What I am refering to is the morals all humans, regardless of culture or nationality, are under.

That depends on whether you believe morals are absolute. Many do not. Respect other people's opinion on that ground. Given the only person who speaks for "God" is man, I don't think you can offer any evidence of absolute morals, merely you have FAITH in absolute morality.


What you believe (or for that matter some 19th century poser believed) is rather irrelevant. What matters is what is there.

What matters if proving what's there, and as one smart alec writer pointed out, proof denies faith, and without faith, you no longer have a god, just another big guy with a large stick.


Other evidence shows otherwise, for me example.
You see, there s a price God allowed for humanity to have freedom. Human beings have the option to commit evil. Why? Because, if we were not given the choice between good and evil, we be nothing but robots. We would be lifeless. However, God gave us the ability to make the choice freely, without interference.

That's not evidence, that's conjecture. You have no data to back that up as evidence.


However, all opitions have consquences and the moral laws, like the physical, have their own. By choosing evil, one destroys oneself.

Again, that's moral conjecture. I've met many people who you'd deem as evil who rather enjoy themselves, and I've seen many people you'd say as morally righteous be down right unhappy. What happens after is not for either you or I to say, unless you can produce a phone line to a higher deity to settle the argument.

[Gatomon41]

That depends on whether you believe morals are absolute. Many do not.
What an individual believes does not mean thats how the world really works. That is a simple fact of our universe.


Respect other people's opinion on that ground.
The word tolerate is the better word. I understand that others do not believe, and I will understand the choice they have made. But that still does not mean I can not state my own beliefs.



Given the only person who speaks for "God" is man, I don't think you can offer any evidence of absolute morals, merely you have FAITH in absolute morality.

There is evidence, though not in the sernse you refer to. The evidence is, of course, your own conscience. You can try to ignore it, or not even think its there, but no human can escape from himself.



What matters if proving what's there, and as one smart alec writer pointed out, proof denies faith, and without faith, you no longer have a god, just another big guy with a large stick.

How does proof deny faith? The proof is always arround us. We just never see the Reason with our own eyes.



That's not evidence, that's conjecture. You have no data to back that up as evidence.

Irrlevant, considering the evidence you want is physical. And I can't provide phsyical evidence for what isn't corproral or not bound to the temporal. However, the evidence behind this is exist in theology and philsophy.


Again, that's moral conjecture. I've met many people who you'd deem as evil who rather enjoy themselves,
A person driving drunk might think they have a good time, but they're just a few miles to a cliff edge.

Also, it's human nature for humans to like doing evil. That's the consqence of the Orginal Sin. Pleasure does not equate to goodness. There's a difference between Joy and feeling a few seconds of endorphines.


and I've seen many people you'd say as morally righteous be down right unhappy.
Lets see, every day they try to do good in a world that at times seems rather irremdemmable. Some of these people might ddeliver food to straving, poverty imperished pweople. Some may treat dying patents. Others may be exhausted from fighting for a good cause.

They may not seem to have fun, but these people are doing something statisfying, something that will pay opff in the long run. Patence is a virtue.


What happens after is not for either you or I to say, unless you can produce a phone line to a higher deity to settle the argument.
That's a rather irrelevant conclusion. A debate simply does not end sinmply because you don't like the evidence already provided.

[James]

What an individual believes does not mean thats how the world really works. That is a simple fact of our universe.

Hardly a counter-argument as it can be equally applied to you, if not more so. I'm saying an individual cannot know how the universe works, you are saying you DO know how the universe works, given you state that an individual cannot know, that merely counters your own point.


The word tolerate is the better word. I understand that others do not believe, and I will understand the choice they have made. But that still does not mean I can not state my own beliefs.


You specifically said what the poster or his sources believe is irrelevant. That's not a statement on your opinion, but on theirs, and hardly a tolerant one.


There is evidence, though not in the sernse you refer to. The evidence is, of course, your own conscience. You can try to ignore it, or not even think its there, but no human can escape from himself.

That's fair enough. I would not be so arrogant to presume on personal faith. What I'd say what you "sense" and what you can rationalise are too different things. I've not experienced this conscience, beyond my knowledge that man fears the unknown, from a skin colour he's not seen before, to the gates of death itself. The need to believe doesn't validate the belief in my books, given psychology is a complex thing, but if you do believe despite that, you are a lucky man for even if you could be wrong in death, you'll probably have a more a less fearful life.


How does proof deny faith? The proof is always arround us. We just never see the Reason with our own eyes.

That's conjecture, not proof. You've taken evidence of one thing and connected it to another with no fact or tangible evidence. By human definition, that's not proof, it's faith.

As soon as you can prove a god exists, you no longer need to have faith he exists. Proof overwrites faith. What was uncertain becomes a certainty.


Irrlevant, considering the evidence you want is physical. And I can't provide phsyical evidence for what isn't corproral or not bound to the temporal. However, the evidence behind this is exist in theology and philsophy.

Many would argue that he doesn't exist in philosophy, so that's not necessarily a good bed fellow. And if every other sphere of human understanding used religious "evidence" (the sort that deems itself beyond such requirements), then we'd be in a real stick.

If you can't prove it, you can't know it. There is nothing to prove your god over another god, or over the pink flappadoodle beast which uses it's power of physics to turn night into day. If we can't argue for the pink flappadoodle on the basis that pink flappadoodle doesn't physically exist, for he is a being bound by temporal and non-corporeal standards, we can't really give God the same sort of release from physical evidence.


A person driving drunk might think they have a good time, but they're just a few miles to a cliff edge.

A person can just fall of a cliff, be they drunk or not. In fact, I've heard of sober people being swept out to sea while I've been happily drunk in a bar. The analogy is a futile one because it attempts to simplify what isn't that simple. As with all things which try and break grey into black or white, they only end up making purple.


Also, it's human nature for humans to like doing evil. That's the consqence of the Orginal Sin. Pleasure does not equate to goodness. There's a difference between Joy and feeling a few seconds of endorphines.

Again, it depends whether you can define evil. Generally, I find people who actually try and understand the complications of human behaviour, find life isn't so simple. We'd all LOVE life to be simple, because then we'd know what we're doing is right. That above all is one of the key issues of ego: validation. It's one reason people call for a god; to know what they are doing is right, and to validate that, you prove what others are doing is wrong.

I would argue there is no good and there is no evil, merely social associations of both. Most of which are based around ego, fear and lack of understanding - or want to understanding, because understanding problems means you can't so easily box them into simple solutions. Ask Bill O'Reilly. :)


Lets see, every day they try to do good in a world that at times seems rather irremdemmable. Some of these people might ddeliver food to straving, poverty imperished pweople. Some may treat dying patents. Others may be exhausted from fighting for a good cause.

First off, "they" is way too large a group for you to honestly define. You don't know these "they" people (given for you to use them as a substantial argument, they'd have to be a large group), so it seems arrogant to presume that because one action they may do is good, that they are happy - or righteous.

People aren't so simple. Priests have strayed into various dark realms, doctors save thousands of lives but can go home and beat the wife, those who deliver food to the poor may neglect their own children. A "good" person is so hard to define, and the presumption that all these "good" people are singularly religious, is another fallacy. You'll find just as many people trying to help people who don't need to believe in a god to do so.


They may not seem to have fun, but these people are doing something statisfying, something that will pay opff in the long run. Patence is a virtue.

Unless you are a body snatcher and have access to the minds of these people, I don't think you or I have the right to speak for them as a group so explicitly. These people are people.

Interesting question would be whether these people would be as willing to fight the good fight if they had no god? Isn't the reward that drives them on, or the act? And if it's the act, is it actually the high from feeling you've done good that drives them - the selfish pleasure of validation again?

Funny really, the only way a person could perhaps be defined as being "good" would be if he had no kingdom waiting at the end of the line; that he wasn't going to be rewarded or validated. Religion, in fact, bares no relevance to whether a man does socially just things.


That's a rather irrelevant conclusion. A debate simply does not end sinmply because you don't like the evidence already provided.

Certainly doesn't, but you need to provide evidence to merit a serious debate, and religion really doesn't give you that option.

It's not up to me to prove a god doesn't exist anymore than I'd expect you to prove my flappadoodle doesn't exist. It's up to you to bring the proof that your spiritual belief can be used to challenge an argument based on social ideology, not the other way round.