Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 67
  1. #41
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Chicago IL
    Posts
    1,241
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard View Post
    Jesus most definatly would not be in favor of guns or the 2nd amendment to the constitution.
    Matthew 5:21-26
    21 “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder,[a] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister[b][c] will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’[d] is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.
    23 “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, 24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift.

    25 “Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still together on the way, or your adversary may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison. 26 Truly I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny."

    Jesus tells his followers to deal with problems by facing your ememy face to face and that it would be cowardly to resort to violence and not deal with your problems directly.
    Jesus goes on to say: Matthew 5:38-42
    38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you."

    Jesus tells his followers directly and clearly not to resist your enemies. It at possible allow them to commit their physical harm on you, because you will get what you deserve in heaven and your enemie will get what they deserve in hell.




    Most hypocrites would not admit to being a hypocrite though. I know i am a hypocrite, but at least I have the balls to admit it.

    It's never to late to change......
    A flawed creature can still improve themselves constantly, just because we are flawed does mean that we need to accept things the way they are in our lives.






    you shoulda just said that.....haha
    Fine. You win.
    Witty puns...

  2. #42
    Banned Indefinitely
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Bath
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by Squatch347 View Post
    You admitted to hypocrisy. The definition of that word is believing that certain moral or legal standards apply to others, but not to yourself. Is that what you meant by that word?
    then, yes. From my observational perspective, there are certain laws that apply to me and not to you.

    ---------- Post added at 06:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:57 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by chadn737 View Post
    That is not at all what that verse says. The verse speaks about the practice of publicly displaying piety to bring attention to yourself and to glorify yourself, but does not condemn public confession or worship.
    He does disavow public worship. he says "But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to you father". Is that not an instruction to pray privately?

    And frankly I have no idea what your argument is even about. Its disorganized and seems to jump all around in its criticism of Christianity.
    I have no problem with Christ or Christianity, I have a problem with Christians. I am critisizing people who claim to be christians, I am NOT critisizing christianity.

    ---------- Post added at 06:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:01 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by theophilus View Post
    Then how do you explain this?

    He said to them, “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.
    (Luke 22:36 ESV)
    You can fight without violence, my friend. You do not need to use violence to win a fight.
    When Peter used his sword to try to prevent the arrest of Jesus, Jesus told him to put his sword away, not throw it away. Peter was wrong in using his sword at that time but Jesus never indicated that it was wrong for him to have a sword.
    What is the point of having a sword in the first place if you cant use it? What would Peter need a sword for in the first place?

    This verse has often been interpreted to mean that we shouldn't use force to defend ourselves but read it carefully. Jesus said that we are to turn the other cheek when someone slaps us on the right cheek. Most people are right handed and in order to hit someone on the right cheek with your right hand you will have to strike him with the back of the hand. This isn't a very effective method if you are trying to hurt him physically so it must be a method of insulting someone. Jesus taught that we aren't to retaliate for insults. He wasn't teaching that we can't defend ourselves against someone who is trying to injure us.
    Once again, you need not have to use violence to defend yourself. There are other ways of fighting...

    ---------- Post added at 06:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:05 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilPup John View Post
    Fine. You win.
    yeah? do i win something? or you just a coward?

    in your words, "You don't just get to run off after all of this..."

  3. #43
    Administrator

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    10,730
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard View Post
    then, yes. From my observational perspective, there are certain laws that apply to me and not to you.
    Such as (and I'm assuming you mean apply to me, but not to you)?
    "Suffering lies not with inequality, but with dependence." -Voltaire
    "Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.” -G.K. Chesterton
    Also, if you think I've overlooked your post please shoot me a PM, I'm not intentionally ignoring you.


  4. #44
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    13,847
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard
    You can fight without violence, my friend. You do not need to use violence to win a fight.
    So what exactly do you do, if you see a man raping a woman? Write a strongly-worded letter?
    If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe. - Soren Kierkegaard
    **** you, I won't do what you tell me

    HOLY CRAP MY BLOG IS AWESOME

  5. #45
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Chicago IL
    Posts
    1,241
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    yeah? do i win something? or you just a coward?

    in your words, "You don't just get to run off after all of this.."
    Actually, you don't I just don't spend a lot of time on the forums debating people, especially in the religious section, and felt rather than waste your time waiting for my response; I'd just back out.

    But since we are throwing around words; what the hell. I've got some free time.
    1. 21 “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder,[a] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister[b][c] will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’[d] is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.
    23 “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, 24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift.
    Nowhere in any of that do I see clear evidence of Jesus being against weapons; only against improper use. What seems to be said here is simply harbor no grudge against anyone.

    I see no mention of Jesus saying to not defend oneself, nor do I see anything specifically against the 2nd amendment.

    So these quotes are meaningless in your claim.

    To the turn the other cheek comment; it's often seen as a meek approach, while others have interpreted it as a challenge.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turning_the_other_cheek

    I've heard both schools of thought. At best you're only showing one side of the coin. A literal interpretation of it. Thing's may or may not be as they seem.

    Most hypocrites would not admit to being a hypocrite though. I know i am a hypocrite, but at least I have the balls to admit it.
    I don't think anyone here claims to be better than anyone. In fact; I think my point was that we are all flawed creatures incapable of perfection. We are all hypocrites.

    This is a great example of what I was talking about. Someone passing judgement without authority.

    Seriously... are you questioning people's masculinity on the internet?

    It's never to late to change......
    A flawed creature can still improve themselves constantly, just because we are flawed does mean that we need to accept things the way they are in our lives.
    I don't believe I ever said it was. Nor did I ever say one should stop trying to improve themselves. So I don't understand why this is relevant.
    Witty puns...

  6. #46
    Banned Indefinitely
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Bath
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by Squatch347 View Post
    Such as (and I'm assuming you mean apply to me, but not to you)?
    Exactly....

    I am not you, so why should I try to be you.

    ---------- Post added at 12:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:43 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by CliveStaples View Post
    So what exactly do you do, if you see a man raping a woman? Write a strongly-worded letter?
    No I would help the women out in a non violent way. I would try my best to get the rapist to be more mad or angry at me, instead of the women, so she is safe and that I am not. I would NOT kill, shoot or stab the guy. That would be the cowardly way of dealing with the problem at hand. i would confront the man repeatadly until he stopped, enlisting help from other sources if possible.

    ---------- Post added at 12:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:49 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilPup John View Post
    Actually, you don't I just don't spend a lot of time on the forums debating people, especially in the religious section, and felt rather than waste your time waiting for my response; I'd just back out.

    But since we are throwing around words; what the hell. I've got some free time.
    That's what im here for. If i am wasting your time, that is your problem and not mine.


    Nowhere in any of that do I see clear evidence of Jesus being against weapons; only against improper use. What seems to be said here is simply harbor no grudge against anyone.

    I see no mention of Jesus saying to not defend oneself, nor do I see anything specifically against the 2nd amendment.

    So these quotes are meaningless in your claim.

    To the turn the other cheek comment; it's often seen as a meek approach, while others have interpreted it as a challenge.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turning_the_other_cheek

    I've heard both schools of thought. At best you're only showing one side of the coin. A literal interpretation of it. Thing's may or may not be as they seem.
    No where does Jesus explicitly endorse violence or possesion of violent weapons. If you arent supposed to harbour anger against anyone even your worst enemies, then what is the point of owning a weapon that has the ability to murder?


    I don't think anyone here claims to be better than anyone. In fact; I think my point was that we are all flawed creatures incapable of perfection. We are all hypocrites.

    This is a great example of what I was talking about. Someone passing judgement without authority.

    Seriously... are you questioning people's masculinity on the internet?
    "Balls" not "testicules"........ How do you know that I am a man?
    I have the authority to judge whom ever I want, whenever in whatever way I wish. But I am prepared for when people will invitably disagree with me. Justice is not justice unless we are all judged perfectly equally.


    I don't believe I ever said it was. Nor did I ever say one should stop trying to improve themselves. So I don't understand why this is relevant.
    Christians, or most anyway, claim to already have all of the answers to Life, the Universe and Everything (which is 42, if I am not mistaken). If there is no room for further knowledge of our existance, then why would anyone need or what to radically improve their lives.

    I dont know if I know or not, therefore leaving room for more.

  7. #47
    Administrator

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    10,730
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard View Post
    Exactly....

    I am not you, so why should I try to be you.
    You'll notice the question mark at the end of my last response. I was asking for an example of a rule that applies to me (or others) that does not apply to you.

    ---------- Post added at 12:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:20 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard View Post
    No I would help the women out in a non violent way. I would try my best to get the rapist to be more mad or angry at me, instead of the women, so she is safe and that I am not. I would NOT kill, shoot or stab the guy. That would be the cowardly way of dealing with the problem at hand. i would confront the man repeatadly until he stopped, enlisting help from other sources if possible.
    So he would walk over, shoot you dead and proceed to again rape the woman. How exactly is the situation better then?
    "Suffering lies not with inequality, but with dependence." -Voltaire
    "Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.” -G.K. Chesterton
    Also, if you think I've overlooked your post please shoot me a PM, I'm not intentionally ignoring you.


  8. #48
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard View Post
    No I would help the women out in a non violent way. I would try my best to get the rapist to be more mad or angry at me, instead of the women, so she is safe and that I am not. I would NOT kill, shoot or stab the guy. That would be the cowardly way of dealing with the problem at hand. i would confront the man repeatadly until he stopped, enlisting help from other sources if possible.
    How would you get him to be more angry with you? Call him names?

    And what do you think Jesus would have done if he saw a woman being raped? Not let it happen, I know that much. One can use physical force to defend another person, without using excessive/lethal force.

  9. #49
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,427
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard View Post
    E
    No I would help the women out in a non violent way. I would try my best to get the rapist to be more mad or angry at me, instead of the women, so she is safe and that I am not. I would NOT kill, shoot or stab the guy. That would be the cowardly way of dealing with the problem at hand. i would confront the man repeatadly until he stopped, enlisting help from other sources if possible.
    How would you measure success? You'd consider the rape thwarted if and only if ...

    I actually don't have much of an issue of you using non-violence to stop violence (iff you think it would be as effective as using force). I do have an issue when you state that it is "cowardly" to intervene using force. I fail to see how physical intervention, in the described example, could be considered cowardice.

    I would judge that whatever stops the rape fastest is the best solution. What is your criterion?
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  10. #50
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    13,847
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard
    No I would help the women out in a non violent way. I would try my best to get the rapist to be more mad or angry at me, instead of the women, so she is safe and that I am not. I would NOT kill, shoot or stab the guy. That would be the cowardly way of dealing with the problem at hand. i would confront the man repeatadly until he stopped, enlisting help from other sources if possible.
    So...you'd talk to him? That would be your response, saying words.

    I mean, I can understand a desire to spare the guy's life--maybe you think all life is sacred--but you won't even give him a shove? You won't even try to knock him over? And all due to some philosophical opposition to the notion of applying force to another person--bumper cars must be hell for you!

    EDIT: Would you use violence (e.g., shoving someone) to move someone out of the way of a car in order to spare their life? Or is that forbidden as well?
    Last edited by CliveStaples; May 14th, 2012 at 03:38 PM.
    If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe. - Soren Kierkegaard
    **** you, I won't do what you tell me

    HOLY CRAP MY BLOG IS AWESOME

  11. #51
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Chicago IL
    Posts
    1,241
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    That's what im here for. If i am wasting your time, that is your problem and not mine.
    I never said you were wasting my time; only that when people don't respond to my posts I feel cheated. So if I don't intend on following a topic I drop out. It's common courtesy.

    No where does Jesus explicitly endorse violence or possesion of violent weapons. If you arent supposed to harbour anger against anyone even your worst enemies, then what is the point of owning a weapon that has the ability to murder?
    You can't prove either point; is my point. There are schools of thought that feel that "turn the other cheek" is a challenge to the one who slapped them. Jesus also came into the temple tossing tables and throwing coins about; disgusted by the fact that the temple had become a trading place for merchants.

    My point is rather simple: there are not a lot of inconsistencies; and you can't offer any support that says Jesus is against self defense. Beyond that; how do you know that I am not a competition shooter who engages in competition? I may not even own a weapon for self defense reasons; perhaps I am a collector; perhaps I am a target shooter.

    Cars have the ability to murder to. I've argued this up and down with many people. My hands have the ability to murder another person.


    "Balls" not "testicules"........ How do you know that I am a man?
    First off: I never said you were a man. I said "are you questioning peoples masculinity".

    Second: masculinity is not a strictly male traight. Plenty of females can be rather masculine.

    Third: Whether you're a man or not has no bearing on your questioning of another persons masculinity.
    I have the authority to judge whom ever I want, whenever in whatever way I wish. But I am prepared for when people will invitably disagree with me. Justice is not justice unless we are all judged perfectly equally.
    You don't have any authority; you merely have opinions. Your opinion has no more weight than my opinion; or anyone's for that matter.

    You don't have any authority; especially here. You merely have the right to express your opinion. You have no authority to judge anyone.



    Christians, or most anyway, claim to already have all of the answers to Life, the Universe and Everything (which is 42, if I am not mistaken). If there is no room for further knowledge of our existance, then why would anyone need or what to radically improve their lives.
    You bring up a lot of interesting; yet irrelevant points in your post. I don't see how this relates to the quote.
    I dont know if I know or not, therefore leaving room for more.
    You sure speak as if you know.

    1. You've said that Jesus would thoroughly disapprove of firearms and the 2nd Amendment.

    2. You've made some broad and ignorant generalizations about Christians.

    3. Everything about your posts oozes arrogance, superiority, and overall snobbery.

    I formally withdraw from this debate. I've spoken my peace and feel that there is simply no compromise here. You are right, and I am wrong; and I am right and you are wrong. I have no desire to bang my head against another wall.

    Good show.
    Witty puns...

  12. #52
    Banned Indefinitely
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Bath
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by Squatch347 View Post
    You'll notice the question mark at the end of my last response. I was asking for an example of a rule that applies to me (or others) that does not apply to you.
    Well you pay taxes, I prefer to donate my money where I see fit instead of giving it to the military so that they can occupy foriegn nations. Taxes dont apply to me because I dont pay taxes.
    So he would walk over, shoot you dead and proceed to again rape the woman. How exactly is the situation better then?
    How is it better if I murder the guy? Then two of us are idiots and not just one.

    Non-violent resistance is more noble than violence. I prefer to stand up to my oppressors rather than murder than.

    ---------- Post added at 03:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:44 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinBrowning View Post
    How would you get him to be more angry with you? Call him names?
    Why not try to actually help the women? Id put myself in her place if it would save her.

    And what do you think Jesus would have done if he saw a woman being raped? Not let it happen, I know that much. One can use physical force to defend another person, without using excessive/lethal force.
    ALL violent force is excessive....

    Jesus would have felt sorry for the women and known that the rapist would get far more punishment in hell than he would on earth. Jesus could care less about his or anyone elses mortal bodies, he wants to save our souls. A soul becomes tainted when its body chooses to murder.

    Jesus would have sacrificed HIS body to that of the women, but he would never murder another person.

    ---------- Post added at 03:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:48 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    How would you measure success? You'd consider the rape thwarted if and only if ...
    the women was free from her bondage. Freedom, my friend is far more important than security. Success would come when the women is Free.

    I actually don't have much of an issue of you using non-violence to stop violence (iff you think it would be as effective as using force). I do have an issue when you state that it is "cowardly" to intervene using force. I fail to see how physical intervention, in the described example, could be considered cowardice.
    Murder is cowardly. Death is cowardly. Using violence would only cause more problems.
    I would judge that whatever stops the rape fastest is the best solution. What is your criterion?
    So based on you criteria a single bullet to the head of the rapist would stop him the fastest.

    Id rather do it right than fast.

    ---------- Post added at 03:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:51 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by CliveStaples View Post
    So...you'd talk to him? That would be your response, saying words.
    No, loud people dont accomplish much. Words rarely solve anything.

    I mean, I can understand a desire to spare the guy's life--maybe you think all life is sacred--but you won't even give him a shove? You won't even try to knock him over? And all due to some philosophical opposition to the notion of applying force to another person--bumper cars must be hell for you!
    Violence entails death. Giving the guy a good shove is not violent because no one would die.
    PS> we are always applying "force" to others....

    EDIT: Would you use violence (e.g., shoving someone) to move someone out of the way of a car in order to spare their life? Or is that forbidden as well?
    The Oxford Dictionary definition of the word "violence" is "using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something'. By shoving the guy I do not intend to hurt the guy, damage the guy, or murder the guy. I just want to get the guy out of the way.

    Violence is when someone is hurt, damaged or killed. There is non-physical violence, as well you know.

    Violence is the intent to destroy, usually by any means neccesary. I refuse to kill.

  13. #53
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,427
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard View Post
    Well you pay taxes, I prefer to donate my money where I see fit instead of giving it to the military so that they can occupy foriegn nations. Taxes dont apply to me because I dont pay taxes.
    How is it better if I murder the guy? Then two of us are idiots and not just one.

    Non-violent resistance is more noble than violence. I prefer to stand up to my oppressors rather than murder than.

    ---------- Post added at 03:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:44 PM ----------

    Why not try to actually help the women? Id put myself in her place if it would save her.

    ALL violent force is excessive....

    Jesus would have felt sorry for the women and known that the rapist would get far more punishment in hell than he would on earth. Jesus could care less about his or anyone elses mortal bodies, he wants to save our souls. A soul becomes tainted when its body chooses to murder.

    Jesus would have sacrificed HIS body to that of the women, but he would never murder another person.

    ---------- Post added at 03:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:48 PM ----------

    the women was free from her bondage. Freedom, my friend is far more important than security. Success would come when the women is Free.

    Murder is cowardly. Death is cowardly. Using violence would only cause more problems.
    So based on you criteria a single bullet to the head of the rapist would stop him the fastest.

    Id rather do it right than fast.
    I personally have no problem with a bullet to the head, but I am asking for your valuation. How long would the girl's rape be acceptable to you such that you'd continue to attempt to persuade the attacker to stop using non-forceful methods? If you stopped the attacker, but he raped her for 30 minutes, would you consider your tactic a success? What makes your method right? You define success as allowing her to be free except you have insisted that she must endure some indeterminable time of not being free (i.e. being raped). So, how is freeing her correctly the antithesis of freeing her quickly?
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  14. #54
    Banned Indefinitely
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Bath
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilPup John View Post
    I never said you were wasting my time; only that when people don't respond to my posts I feel cheated. So if I don't intend on following a topic I drop out. It's common courtesy.
    So would I not then also feel "jipped" by your refusal to participate? I honestly dont care either way.



    You can't prove either point; is my point. There are schools of thought that feel that "turn the other cheek" is a challenge to the one who slapped them. Jesus also came into the temple tossing tables and throwing coins about; disgusted by the fact that the temple had become a trading place for merchants.
    His intent was not that of violence. He did not intend on destroying anyone's lives. He turned over the tables of the money changers because he refused not to fight the idiots of the world. I am not a Pacifist. I do not look down upon couragous people who stand up for what they beleive in. But if I cant accord others the same courtesy, than there is not point in the first place. Freedom is only freedom, if everyone IS free.
    My point is rather simple: there are not a lot of inconsistencies; and you can't offer any support that says Jesus is against self defense. Beyond that; how do you know that I am not a competition shooter who engages in competition? I may not even own a weapon for self defense reasons; perhaps I am a collector; perhaps I am a target shooter.
    I give one whole hell of alot of **** what you do. You are defending violence, and therefore you are my enemy. Anyone who defend death or violence, deserves to be told the truth.
    Cars have the ability to murder to. I've argued this up and down with many people. My hands have the ability to murder another person.
    I dont own a car, neither do I drive. If you want to get into the merit of cars, or motor vehicles that is fine with me. The difference between me and an inanimate object is that I have the ablilty to choose. I known I am a killer, I know I am a hypocrite, but as a person I have the ablility to refuse to kill and to refuse to be a hypocrite. A gun, or a car cannot choose, but the idiot using them sure can.




    First off: I never said you were a man. I said "are you questioning peoples masculinity".
    I am questioning your humanity.

    Second: masculinity is not a strictly male traight. Plenty of females can be rather masculine.
    and men dont neccesarily have to be masculine. There are plenty of cowardly men out there.

    Third: Whether you're a man or not has no bearing on your questioning of another persons masculinity.
    Then yes, i am questioning your mascilinity.


    You don't have any authority; you merely have opinions. Your opinion has no more weight than my opinion; or anyone's for that matter.
    Yes, but it is mine, is it not?
    You don't have any authority; especially here. You merely have the right to express your opinion. You have no authority to judge anyone.
    I can judge however I see fit....



    You bring up a lot of interesting; yet irrelevant points in your post. I don't see how this relates to the quote.
    You cant claim to be in favor of self improvement, yet claim to have all of answers already. Is that not hypocracy? Is that not what started this whole debate in the first place?


    You sure speak as if you know.
    Maybe I do know....you did not read my statement.

    1. You've said that Jesus would thoroughly disapprove of firearms and the 2nd Amendment.
    Yes, I beleive someone who says "Put away your sword," Jesus told him. "Those who use the sword will die by the sword." (Matthew 26:52)
    2. You've made some broad and ignorant generalizations about Christians.

    3. Everything about your posts oozes arrogance, superiority, and overall snobbery.
    Yahhhh......so???????? What are you going to do about it? What does it matter if I am arrogant, superior or snobbish? is that against the rules? can I not be a complete snob? or is it against the rules to disagree with you?
    I formally withdraw from this debate. I've spoken my peace and feel that there is simply no compromise here. You are right, and I am wrong; and I am right and you are wrong. I have no desire to bang my head against another wall.
    Did you think that this debate was going to fix the world? and solve everyones problems? Why must we compromise? Can we not agree to disagree and have a civil debate, like the one we have been having? Why must you withdraw?
    Good show.[/QUOTE]

    ---------- Post added at 04:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:20 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    I personally have no problem with a bullet to the head, but I am asking for your valuation. How long would the girl's rape be acceptable to you such that you'd continue to attempt to persuade the attacker to stop using non-forceful methods? If you stopped the attacker, but he raped her for 30 minutes, would you consider your tactic a success? What makes your method right? You define success as allowing her to be free except you have insisted that she must endure some indeterminable time of not being free (i.e. being raped). So, how is freeing her correctly the antithesis of freeing her quickly?
    I just do not how to answer this question using my own words. I simply do not have the words. However, here are some that may or may not anwser your questions:

    If someone is intent on inflicting short-term violence Gandhi suggests that we should limit our own ego, achieve a larger perspective, and empathize with the feelings of the terrorist, even if they are found to be inadequate and dangerous, it allows for dialogue and for creating non-threatening relations with the violent other. In addition, as Gandhi repeatedly asserts, while intellectual approaches with rational analysis often have no real transformative effect on the other, approaches of the heart involving deep personal emotions and feeling often have profound, rational, transformative effects. If one refuses to strike back and is willing to embrace self-sacrifice and self-suffering, this can disrupt the expectations of the violent other, lead to a decentring and reorienting of an extremely violent situation, and touch the heart of the violent other. Throughout his writings on Satyagraha and other methods of resisting and transforming violence, Gandhi proposes numerous ways of relating to short-term violence and moving towards conflict resolution grounded in truth and nonviolence.

    Nevertheless Gandhi’s nonviolent proposals are sometimes completely ineffective in preventing certain kinds of short-term violence (e.g. a madman about to shoot innocent people; a rapist determined to rape; a suicide bomber about to explode a bomb; etc.). Non-Gandhian proposals are also ineffective in preventing such violence. In such cases there is not opportunity for empathy, communication, changing causes, or any of the other preventive measures that are the strength of Gandhi’s orientation. Terrorism is often expressed through completely impersonal structures and relations in which there is not possibility for constructive, personal, nonviolent interaction.
    If we choose an eye for eye, instead of a different road, it would only make us both blind. One is enough.

    I simply do not have the answers for how to effectively deal with a mad rapist, non violently. But I would forever refuse to kill another person, that just makes no sense.

    ---------- Post added at 04:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:29 PM ----------

    http://www.mkgandhi-sarvodaya.org/articles/oct0801.htm
    here is my source from the quote above.

  15. #55
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,427
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard View Post
    If we choose an eye for eye, instead of a different road, it would only make us both blind. One is enough.
    That is a very cavalier attitude to have when someone else is the one being raped. Additionally, I am not even suggesting an eye for an eye. I am suggesting physically stepping in and restraining the rapist would be better than allowing the rape to occur. Is pulling someone off of a victim and restraining them considered an eye for an eye?

    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard View Post
    I simply do not have the answers for how to effectively deal with a mad rapist, non violently. But I would forever refuse to kill another person, that just makes no sense.
    Fine. Refuse to kill. There is a LOT of wiggle room between doing nothing and killing.

    In summary, you have failed to justify the refusal to use force in order to stop a rapist. Furthermore, you have failed to show use of force is somehow cowardly.

    P.S.
    Ghandi may have practiced a form of non-violent protest, but he was a soldier in the British army and participated in a real war. Furthermore, his views on non-violence are his own opinion and not really relevant. I find it interesting you cannot formulate your own views on how you'd define success for the proposed situation.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  16. #56
    Banned Indefinitely
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Bath
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    That is a very cavalier attitude to have when someone else is the one being raped. Additionally, I am not even suggesting an eye for an eye. I am suggesting physically stepping in and restraining the rapist would be better than allowing the rape to occur. Is pulling someone off of a victim and restraining them considered an eye for an eye?

    Fine. Refuse to kill. There is a LOT of wiggle room between doing nothing and killing.
    My point exactly.....

    In summary, you have failed to justify the refusal to use force in order to stop a rapist. Furthermore, you have failed to show use of force is somehow cowardly.
    Force can be justified and may be neccesary, but I said 'violence', not 'force'. Violence is cowardly. I have never said that I would refuse to use force, just violence.

    P.S.
    Ghandi may have practiced a form of non-violent protest, but he was a soldier in the British army and participated in a real war. Furthermore, his views on non-violence are his own opinion and not really relevant. I find it interesting you cannot formulate your own views on how you'd define success for the proposed situation.
    Gandhi was NOT in the British Army, he was in the Ambulence Corps, an independent, non-military organization devoted to saving lives, not taking them away.

    Success, would be if the rape never occured in the first place. If we would just educate people to be people and not indocrinate them with patriotism and obediance, then maybe people would be nicer to eachother and rapes would not happen in the first place.

    I cannot tell you or anyone what I would do in any hypothetical situation because I have not had the opportunity to see what I would do. I can tell you what I might do or what I would try to do, but jesus, I have no clue what I would really do.....I would try really hard not to murder anyone in the process though.

  17. #57
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard View Post
    Jesus would have felt sorry for the women and known that the rapist would get far more punishment in hell than he would on earth. Jesus could care less about his or anyone elses mortal bodies, he wants to save our souls. A soul becomes tainted when its body chooses to murder.

    Jesus would have sacrificed HIS body to that of the women, but he would never murder another person.
    First of all, it would not be murder if one accidentally killed the rapist while trying to stop him. It would be manslaughter. Second, I didn't say that one should kill the rapist. I said that one may use force to stop an attacker, without using lethal force.

  18. #58
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,427
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard View Post
    My point exactly.....

    Force can be justified and may be neccesary, but I said 'violence', not 'force'. Violence is cowardly. I have never said that I would refuse to use force, just violence.
    I think you are walking the dog back into the dog house.
    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard View Post
    No I would help the women out in a non violent way. I would try my best to get the rapist to be more mad or angry at me, instead of the women, so she is safe and that I am not. I would NOT kill, shoot or stab the guy. That would be the cowardly way of dealing with the problem at hand. i would confront the man repeatadly until he stopped, enlisting help from other sources if possible.
    I think you indicated you wouldn't use force at all and you seemed to equivocate all forms of force with violence.

    Gandhi was NOT in the British Army, he was in the Ambulence Corps, an independent, non-military organization devoted to saving lives, not taking them away. [/QUOTE]
    Actually, his primary job was taking lives away. He carried the dead and wounded off the battle field. (See the pun there?). The point is that he was a part of the British armed forces. Yes, not in a fighting role. He was part of the violence in Africa. The getaway driver of a robbery is still an accomplice to robbery. By the way, whether he was an official British army soldier is a matter of semantics and debate.

    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard View Post
    I cannot tell you or anyone what I would do in any hypothetical situation because I have not had the opportunity to see what I would do. I can tell you what I might do or what I would try to do, but jesus, I have no clue what I would really do.....I would try really hard not to murder anyone in the process though.
    Again, my main contention was your use of the word cowardly. You continue to fail to follow up on this point.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  19. #59
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    13,847
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard View Post
    No, loud people dont accomplish much. Words rarely solve anything.
    Well, if you won't use physical force, and you won't use words, what exactly would you do?

    Violence entails death. Giving the guy a good shove is not violent because no one would die.
    PS> we are always applying "force" to others....
    That...is retarded. Maybe it's because you're ignorant, or maybe it's because you're stupid, but not all violence is fatal. If I beat the crap out of you, that's violence--you know, like domestic violence? Or, heck, a woman being raped. I guess that's not "violent" in your book, since women can survive being raped.

    The Oxford Dictionary definition of the word "violence" is "using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something'. By shoving the guy I do not intend to hurt the guy, damage the guy, or murder the guy. I just want to get the guy out of the way.

    Violence is when someone is hurt, damaged or killed. There is non-physical violence, as well you know.

    Violence is the intent to destroy, usually by any means neccesary. I refuse to kill.
    You're misinterpreting violence. You do intend to harm the guy. Just not very seriously. Pushing someone is an assault (literally, in some/most jurisdictions; you could be charged with the crime of Assault).

    Plus, your notion of "intend" is a little vague. If someone's coming at me with a knife, and I think he intends to kill me, and I fire a gun at him in self-defense, I might not want the guy to die. I might not want the guy to be harmed. I just want to get the guy to stop coming at me with a knife. By your standard, shooting a gun at the guy wouldn't be "violent" either.
    If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe. - Soren Kierkegaard
    **** you, I won't do what you tell me

    HOLY CRAP MY BLOG IS AWESOME

  20. #60
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Chicago IL
    Posts
    1,241
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Political Survey

    Quote Originally Posted by SunGuard View Post
    Did you think that this debate was going to fix the world? and solve everyones problems? Why must we compromise? Can we not agree to disagree and have a civil debate, like the one we have been having? Why must you withdraw?
    Good show.
    You don't need to compromise, nor did I say we must. But why the hell would I bother yelling at someone who is just yelling back? It's like arguing with your polar opposite. I wont change your mind, you wont change mine.

    It isn't worth my time to continue to argue with you. It has nothing to do with anything other than a lacking a willingness to continue to commit time to something that will not have a beneficial outcome.

    It's simple. I'm banging my head against a wall, and it isn't worth the commitment of time to continue to follow a thread in which I see no beneficial outcome for myself. I wont change your mind, you wont change mine. There are enough people willing to play with you and continue the debate. I am not. It's nothing more than a lack of caring.
    Witty puns...

 

 
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. LaRouche survey
    By Spartacus in forum Politics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: August 26th, 2011, 08:08 AM
  2. Testing survey
    By Apokalupsis in forum Test Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: October 11th, 2010, 01:31 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •