Double-Yikes: 2000 posts?!

[Darth K'Trava]

Nope. I'll listen to everyone, and I'll even respect it, when I believe that THEY believe what they are saying. Even if it is different from what I believe. Which, so far, it NEVER has been - it has just been worded differently. Imagine that.

Maybe we all oughta back off before it gets more "heated" than it already has.....


Staying up this late, I sure don't think I'm gonna be driving an hour-and-a-half to Raleigh in the morning.... :\

 

[Rystil Arden]

What I'm trying to get at is that philosophies are irrelevant to the truth of right and wrong - how you get there is interesting, but all roads lead to Rome. I believe murder is wrong. So, I think it is to safe to say, do you. It doesn't matter if we took totally perpendicular routes (philosophies) to get to that conclusion. Someone else may come along and say murder is right, and spout a bunch of nonsense. I say nonsense because even coming from completely different backgrounds, you and I would BOTH know that THEY don't even believe what they are saying.

Some things make sense. Some don't. Some people are willing to lie to themselves and others. Some aren't. Doesn't matter how you got there - there you are.

In my personal code, I believe that killing is wrong, no matter what. But I hold myself to much higher standards than others, since each has their own moral system, which I do not judge, as long as the belief is not intrinsically hypocritical. I would respect someone who wanted to kill all humans, incuding themself, to protect nature from our scourge (even if my personal system disagrees), but not someone who murders people and takes their money.

 

[Rystil Arden]

I don't see how anyone can NOT die after reaching that point....

Deathless Frenzy. He once fought to -3000 HP before collapsing dead, the last enemy defeated.

 

[Torm]

I would respect someone who wanted to kill all humans, incuding themself, to protect nature from our scourge (even if my personal system disagrees), but not someone who murders people and takes their money.

You're nitpicking.

You'd respect the nature lover - I would, too, in a way, because on one hand they do kinda have a point. But, charged with the task, you'd try to stop them, right?

 

[Darth K'Trava]

In my personal code, I believe that killing is wrong, no matter what. But I hold myself to much higher standards than others, since each has their own moral system, which I do not judge, as long as the belief is not intrinsically hypocritical. I would respect someone who wanted to kill all humans, incuding themself, to protect nature from our scourge (even if my personal system disagrees), but not someone who murders people and takes their money.

I wouldn't even go that far.... killing is wrong, no matter the cause. The only possibility might be in self-defense. But that'd be about it. Killing is an evil act and also against a certain Commandment as well. There's just way too much killing in the world today, and most of it is due to simple stuff like pettiness, thievery, jealousy, hatred, rage, anger, stupidity, irrationalities, etc... When will it stop?!?!

 

[Torm]

Maybe we all oughta back off before it gets more "heated" than it already has.....

I don't think that is a problem. Rystil seems reasonable enough. And I know I am. We're just chattin'.

 

[Darth K'Trava]

You're nitpicking.

You'd respect the nature lover - I would, too, in a way, because on one hand they do kinda have a point. But, charged with the task, you'd try to stop them, right?

If they're breaking laws, yup. And also harming innocents in their fervor.

 

[Darth K'Trava]

I don't think that is a problem. Rystil seems reasonable enough. And I know I am. We're just chattin'.

Late night chattin' about whether Hitler was evil or not..... and other stuff.....

Not to mention the "duel" between my cleric and his "berserker".... that's a laugh riot.

 

[Rystil Arden]

You're nitpicking.

You'd respect the nature lover - I would, too, in a way, because on one hand they do kinda have a point. But, charged with the task, you'd try to stop them, right?

There's a difference between being willing to stop someone and believing that they are morally justified or that they are evil. I believe that the nature lover is not evil and is morally justified. However, my moral system dictates my actions, and I am justified in stopping him, and morally obligated to do so by my own system.

 

[Torm]

killing is wrong, no matter the cause.

Certainly. But this is where the formula I described comes into play.

Anarchy: They kill indiscriminately, I kill them. No other factors. Two wrongs. No good.

But, if I am charged by people who have a right to expect they will live to see tomorrow to stop people from killing them, then my wrong in killing them (if lethal force is necessary, only) is balanced against doing right in fulfilling my responsibility to them, and leaves me with a net Good. Note I'm not saying a net happy - ain't no happy in this. Sometimes there just isn't.