War

QNX Newsgroups (Archives) qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy
61

Rennie Allen <RAllen@csical.com> wrote:

It is not inevitable to sell to both side to promote war. Even it is
not inevitable to do something intentionally to promote war. Society
can produce worse behaviour than the worst psychopath.

What historical evidence do you have to support this contention ? Name
one conflict in the last 500 years, where violence (or the threat of
imminent violence) was not initiated by a nation under authoritarian
rule.

It’s easy. Burning to death of witches or liquidation of red indians
was even spontanenous and from newer e.g. bombing of Hirosima and Nagasaki
(if Truman hadn’t authoritarian rule :slight_smile:.

But I agree that we should turn to QNX, we are not able to resolve
problems which mankind solves from begin of its history. We can olny
feel by our hearth (or brain, in fact) what is bad and what is good.

Bye, Andy

Authoritarian rule is not always bad, it depends which
authority is in charge at any given point in time, but it certainly has
a far worse record than democracy. On the flip side of this, name one
democratic nation that has initiated a violent conflict. You must
agree that democracies best represent the will of the majority, and that
the actions of democracies best reflect what is “human nature”.

… E.g. USA in
spite of agreement form 1972 produced bacteria weapons which can
liquadate whole mankind. Have I feel that there is no psychopath
in US army and they only maintain peace in long term ?

On the contrary. Statistically, I am certain that there are
psychopaths in the U.S. military, and if it weren’t for the fact that a
civilian government, elected by the people controlled that military,
they would most certainly, have used those biological weapons a long
time ago. This is why the poor turnouts in elections in the U.S. scare
the hell out of me. I am completely unconcerned, however, that the U.S.
controls the most lethal arsenal ever assembled, as long as the ultimate
control of these weapons rests with the majority will of the people of
the U.S.

62

Hum, seems my timing was good to talk about war ;-(

“inn.qnx.com” <mcharest@clipzinformatic.com> wrote in message
news:9n7vmk$nt3$1@inn.qnx.com…

This is not related to QNX but since I almost live here > :wink:


I’ve received an order from a company that is manufacturing and designing
warfare equipment. I’ve been wondering; should I sell to them? Granted
the
software they want will make absolutly no difference between someone
getting
killed or not, but it will possibly make their job easier at doing so.
Luckly I can afford to not sell them, so I have the luxury of being able
to
make a choice.

What would you do if you’d be in my shoes? PS I’m not really looking for
someone to take the decision for me, I want to see what people think.

  • Mario
63

Well, what do you pascifists think about the WTC being hit, and also the
Pentagon by planes… highly unlikely that these are random crashes…

inn.qnx.com wrote:

This is not related to QNX but since I almost live here > :wink:


I’ve received an order from a company that is manufacturing and designing
warfare equipment. I’ve been wondering; should I sell to them? Granted the
software they want will make absolutly no difference between someone getting
killed or not, but it will possibly make their job easier at doing so.
Luckly I can afford to not sell them, so I have the luxury of being able to
make a choice.

What would you do if you’d be in my shoes? PS I’m not really looking for
someone to take the decision for me, I want to see what people think.

  • Mario
64

“Stacey Abshire” <sabshire@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3B9E17D3.4040906@yahoo.com…

Well, what do you pascifists think about the WTC being hit, and also the
Pentagon by planes… highly unlikely that these are random crashes…

So now you want to talk about it :wink: I think it’s sad very sad for lack of
better words. That won’t make me lose faith in the goodness of humanity. I
don’t think vengence will do any good, it would just show to the people that
did this that they were right to do so. People will want vengence,
unfortunately and the cycle will continue. But that’s easy for me to say,
right. I haven’t received a “bomb” on my head, nor did the people that are
important in my life.

inn.qnx.com wrote:

This is not related to QNX but since I almost live here > :wink:


I’ve received an order from a company that is manufacturing and
designing
warfare equipment. I’ve been wondering; should I sell to them? Granted
the
software they want will make absolutly no difference between someone
getting
killed or not, but it will possibly make their job easier at doing so.
Luckly I can afford to not sell them, so I have the luxury of being able
to
make a choice.

What would you do if you’d be in my shoes? PS I’m not really looking
for
someone to take the decision for me, I want to see what people think.

  • Mario
    \
65

It may be yet another example of tyrants mistaking tolerance for weakness.

Stacey Abshire wrote:

Well, what do you pascifists think about the WTC being hit, and also the
Pentagon by planes… highly unlikely that these are random crashes…

inn.qnx.com wrote:

This is not related to QNX but since I almost live here > :wink:


I’ve received an order from a company that is manufacturing and designing
warfare equipment. I’ve been wondering; should I sell to them? Granted the
software they want will make absolutly no difference between someone getting
killed or not, but it will possibly make their job easier at doing so.
Luckly I can afford to not sell them, so I have the luxury of being able to
make a choice.

What would you do if you’d be in my shoes? PS I’m not really looking for
someone to take the decision for me, I want to see what people think.

  • Mario
66

“Mario Charest” <mcharest@clipzinformatic.com> wrote in message
news:9nl65p$33v$1@inn.qnx.com…

“Stacey Abshire” <> sabshire@yahoo.com> > wrote in message
news:> 3B9E17D3.4040906@yahoo.com> …
Well, what do you pascifists think about the WTC being hit, and also the
Pentagon by planes… highly unlikely that these are random
crashes…


So now you want to talk about it > :wink: > I think it’s sad very sad for lack
of
better words. That won’t make me lose faith in the goodness of humanity.
I
don’t think vengence will do any good, it would just show to the people
that
did this that they were right to do so. People will want vengence,
unfortunately and the cycle will continue. But that’s easy for me to say,
right. I haven’t received a “bomb” on my head, nor did the people that
are
important in my life.

Tonight when I get back from home, I will hog my wife and kids. I will
show to my kids what are the results of intolerance and violence. I will
tell them about the dead people, about the unimaginable suffering this
incident cause. I hope they will be moved, touched deep down in their
heart I hope this will leave an imprint they will remember for their life
time.
I hope they will understand the consequences of violence and choose
never to follow that path.

67

“Igor Kovalenko” <Igor.Kovalenko@motorola.com> wrote in message
news:3B9D1DE2.30F573D1@motorola.com…

My point was, it may mean different thing for different people.
Unfortunately all nations (americans not an exception) have tendency to
impose their meaning to whole world > :wink:



Morale system is something what tells you what is virtue and what is
sin. It mostly comes from religious background, so it is bound to be
different in nations with sufficiently different religions. Simple
examples include things like poligamy, which is quite usual in some
places, but is considered sin and even crime in US, except may be in
Utah, lol > :wink:

For tougher example, muslims consider anyone who does not believe into
‘true God’ an ‘unworthy’ man. Many interpretations do not consider it
crime to kill an ‘unfaithful’, there’s even concept of Jihad (holy war
for true God). Afghan mojahideens did not call russians ‘russians’, they
called them ‘unfaithful’. Talibs impose death penalty on anyone who
abandons Islam, when americans believe into freedom of religion. Most
americans would consider that as ‘lack of freedom’, but for muslims it
is not question of freedom at all, it is question of good/evil.
Abandoning Islam is evil in their minds. However (for an extreme
example) raping a captive woman is not an evil deed in some
interpretations (popular these days in Chechnya for example), unless
she’s pregnant. In fact there seems to be no concept of ‘rape’ of a
captive, since captive ‘belongs’ to you, which would be a totally alien
idea to american morale system. They however care to wait till her next
period so she’s ‘clean’ and doesn’t make them ‘dirty’ :\ I don’t really
know how valid such interpretations are, but they do exist, apparently.

\

  • igor

It is incredibly annoying when someone postulates the arguement that
morality is subjective. There are some basic underlining morals that are
held true in all fundamental religions. Some off-shoots may stray a little,
but regardless of their religions or upbringing, some things cannot be
excused.

I can train my dog to attack little children. When my dog begins attacking
children, he should be put down (besides myself of course). Or I can read
the bible and see that it is written that God commanded Moses and Isreal to
attack the Cananites and overtake the land of Canaan so that His work of
salvation could be done . . . that is Christ born in Bethlehem as earlier
forshadowed, so that we can see His work of salvation for everyone. I can
go about telling people what God personally told me, to kill and rape anyone
whom i please. But don’t you touch me Igor, because it is part of my
religion. Who are you to tell me what morals are?

Please note the sarcasm, it was intentional.

I don’t really think that this is what you truely think, or is it?

68

Hi…

The terrorist attack in NewYork and elsewhere is the reason why we here
in North America have to go forth and utilize our resources to protect
our nation. Period.

It is inexplicable to me how any terrorist people can possibly justify
the lost of innocent lives for whatever fanatic reasons they may harbor.

:frowning:(

Miguel.


“inn.qnx.com” wrote:

This is not related to QNX but since I almost live here > :wink:

I’ve received an order from a company that is manufacturing and designing
warfare equipment. I’ve been wondering; should I sell to them? Granted the
software they want will make absolutly no difference between someone getting
killed or not, but it will possibly make their job easier at doing so.
Luckly I can afford to not sell them, so I have the luxury of being able to
make a choice.

What would you do if you’d be in my shoes? PS I’m not really looking for
someone to take the decision for me, I want to see what people think.

  • Mario

–

my opinions are mine, only mine, solely mine, and they are not related
in any possible way to the institution(s) in which I study and work.

Miguel Simon
Research Engineer
School of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering
University of Oklahoma
http://www.amerobotics.ou.edu/
http://www.saic.com

69

The first two examples, are not war (the subject of this discourse) and
the third example was the final response of a conflict initiated by the
Japanese.

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrej Lucny [mailto:andy@nod10.mstep]
Posted At: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 4:40 AM
Posted To: advocacy
Conversation: War
Subject: Re: War


Rennie Allen <RAllen@csical.com> wrote:

It is not inevitable to sell to both side to promote war. Even it is
not inevitable to do something intentionally to promote war. Society
can produce worse behaviour than the worst psychopath.

What historical evidence do you have to support this contention ?
Name
one conflict in the last 500 years, where violence (or the threat of
imminent violence) was not initiated by a nation under authoritarian
rule.

It’s easy. Burning to death of witches or liquidation of red indians
was even spontanenous and from newer e.g. bombing of Hirosima and
Nagasaki
(if Truman hadn’t authoritarian rule :slight_smile:.

But I agree that we should turn to QNX, we are not able to resolve
problems which mankind solves from begin of its history. We can olny
feel by our hearth (or brain, in fact) what is bad and what is good.

Bye, Andy

Authoritarian rule is not always bad, it depends which
authority is in charge at any given point in time, but it certainly
has
a far worse record than democracy. On the flip side of this, name one
democratic nation that has initiated a violent conflict. You must
agree that democracies best represent the will of the majority, and
that
the actions of democracies best reflect what is “human nature”.

… E.g. USA in
spite of agreement form 1972 produced bacteria weapons which can
liquadate whole mankind. Have I feel that there is no psychopath
in US army and they only maintain peace in long term ?

On the contrary. Statistically, I am certain that there are
psychopaths in the U.S. military, and if it weren’t for the fact that
a
civilian government, elected by the people controlled that military,
they would most certainly, have used those biological weapons a long
time ago. This is why the poor turnouts in elections in the U.S.
scare
the hell out of me. I am completely unconcerned, however, that the
U.S.
controls the most lethal arsenal ever assembled, as long as the
ultimate
control of these weapons rests with the majority will of the people
of
the U.S.

70

“Maynard Lanting” <mlanting@atsautomation.com> wrote in message
news:3b9e283d$1@ats2.sentex.ca…

“Igor Kovalenko” <> Igor.Kovalenko@motorola.com> > wrote in message
news:> 3B9D1DE2.30F573D1@motorola.com> …

My point was, it may mean different thing for different people.
Unfortunately all nations (americans not an exception) have tendency to
impose their meaning to whole world > :wink:



Morale system is something what tells you what is virtue and what is
sin. It mostly comes from religious background, so it is bound to be
different in nations with sufficiently different religions. Simple
examples include things like poligamy, which is quite usual in some
places, but is considered sin and even crime in US, except may be in
Utah, lol > :wink:

For tougher example, muslims consider anyone who does not believe into
‘true God’ an ‘unworthy’ man. Many interpretations do not consider it
crime to kill an ‘unfaithful’, there’s even concept of Jihad (holy war
for true God). Afghan mojahideens did not call russians ‘russians’, they
called them ‘unfaithful’. Talibs impose death penalty on anyone who
abandons Islam, when americans believe into freedom of religion. Most
americans would consider that as ‘lack of freedom’, but for muslims it
is not question of freedom at all, it is question of good/evil.
Abandoning Islam is evil in their minds. However (for an extreme
example) raping a captive woman is not an evil deed in some
interpretations (popular these days in Chechnya for example), unless
she’s pregnant. In fact there seems to be no concept of ‘rape’ of a
captive, since captive ‘belongs’ to you, which would be a totally alien
idea to american morale system. They however care to wait till her next
period so she’s ‘clean’ and doesn’t make them ‘dirty’ :\ I don’t really
know how valid such interpretations are, but they do exist, apparently.

\

  • igor


    It is incredibly annoying when someone postulates the arguement that
    morality is subjective. There are some basic underlining morals that are
    held true in all fundamental religions. Some off-shoots may stray a
    little,
    but regardless of their religions or upbringing, some things cannot be
    excused.

I can train my dog to attack little children. When my dog begins
attacking
children, he should be put down (besides myself of course). Or I can read
the bible and see that it is written that God commanded Moses and Isreal
to
attack the Cananites and overtake the land of Canaan so that His work of
salvation could be done . . . that is Christ born in Bethlehem as earlier
forshadowed, so that we can see His work of salvation for everyone. I can
go about telling people what God personally told me, to kill and rape
anyone
whom i please. But don’t you touch me Igor, because it is part of my
religion. Who are you to tell me what morals are?

Please note the sarcasm, it was intentional.

I don’t really think that this is what you truely think, or is it?

I agree with Igor, many problem arise because most people think
their moral is better than other people moral. What you define
as common sense is totaly subjective, that I feel deeply about.

In the example of the dog, what about the dog’s moral.
From his point of view what he did was right. If he could;
he would not understand why he is being killed. He would
probably go on a rampage and kill everyone that is trying
to kill him. The problem would be that the dog would
also think that is moral is valid, never second guessing it.

An alien species could have a good laugh at seeing the dog kill
the child. We do kill dogs for medical reseach don’t we? So
it would be righteous that it works both way no???

Another alien species could notice that we
are destroying the environment, hunting animal for pleasure,
obliterate animal species, playing Quake and Unreal and decide
that we are immoral and wipe us off. Put I suspect they will
observe and then be on their way, letting us do what we do…




71

Not depraved in general but always with a small fraction of depraved
who
sieze power trying to further depraved aims.

A group of depraved individuals just killed > 40,000 New Yorkers…

Exactly, good but not perfect nor perfectable. Thus the true
governmental
genius is designing institutions/policies/charters that work DESPITE
imperfection. Ironically, these are often counter-intuitive: tolerate
adversarial operatives in our midst to preserve freedom of movement,
tolerate pornographers in our midst to preserve freedom of speech, and
so
on.

Agreed. God Bless the United States, and let’s hope that those elected
officials responsible for the response to today’s actions are imbued
with the courage and wisdom to do so appropriately.

Rennie

72

“Miguel Simon” <simon@ou.edu> wrote in message
news:3B9E2CAA.8C076F6C@ou.edu…

Hi…

The terrorist attack in NewYork and elsewhere is the reason why we here
in North America have to go forth and utilize our resources to protect
our nation. Period.

It is inexplicable to me how any terrorist people can possibly justify
the lost of innocent lives for whatever fanatic reasons they may harbor.

It’s making me feel so sad. I looking for something to hold on to:

Probably for the same reason researchers implant cancer in
animal to learn about the desease. Because people that do it
things the cause justify the means. It just that this time the
target is human.

Still If somebody could create a symbol that express more sadness then the
often used “;(” I would be using it now.

:frowning:> (

Miguel.


“inn.qnx.com” wrote:

This is not related to QNX but since I almost live here > :wink:

I’ve received an order from a company that is manufacturing and
designing
warfare equipment. I’ve been wondering; should I sell to them? Granted
the
software they want will make absolutly no difference between someone
getting
killed or not, but it will possibly make their job easier at doing so.
Luckly I can afford to not sell them, so I have the luxury of being able
to
make a choice.

What would you do if you’d be in my shoes? PS I’m not really looking
for
someone to take the decision for me, I want to see what people think.

  • Mario

–

my opinions are mine, only mine, solely mine, and they are not related
in any possible way to the institution(s) in which I study and work.

Miguel Simon
Research Engineer
School of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering
University of Oklahoma
http://www.amerobotics.ou.edu/
http://www.saic.com

73

“Mario Charest” <mcharest@clipzinformatic.com> wrote in message
news:9nlaf6$5mn$1@inn.qnx.com…

I agree with Igor, many problem arise because most people think
their moral is better than other people moral. What you define
as common sense is totaly subjective, that I feel deeply about.

In the example of the dog, what about the dog’s moral.
From his point of view what he did was right. If he could;
he would not understand why he is being killed. He would
probably go on a rampage and kill everyone that is trying
to kill him. The problem would be that the dog would
also think that is moral is valid, never second guessing it.

An alien species could have a good laugh at seeing the dog kill
the child. We do kill dogs for medical reseach don’t we? So
it would be righteous that it works both way no???

Another alien species could notice that we
are destroying the environment, hunting animal for pleasure,
obliterate animal species, playing Quake and Unreal and decide
that we are immoral and wipe us off. Put I suspect they will
observe and then be on their way, letting us do what we do…

So, what are you saying then? It is ok for me to have a “vision” tonight,
simply part of my religion, and kill all say, oriental males, and rape all
oriental women because it is part of my religion? That since i don’t see it
as morally wrong, you can’t punish me?

The dog analogy may have been a stretch, i see that now, as the alien one is
a stretch as well. We are not relative aliens to each other. No matter
what religion or race, we all share common pains, ailments, sorrows etc. I
go so far as to say sharing basic morals. And these MUST be upheld. Or we
are no more advanced than dogs.

74

“Mario Charest” <mcharest@clipzinformatic.com> wrote in message
news:9nlb16$60a$1@inn.qnx.com…

“Miguel Simon” <> simon@ou.edu> > wrote in message
news:> 3B9E2CAA.8C076F6C@ou.edu> …
Hi…

The terrorist attack in NewYork and elsewhere is the reason why we here
in North America have to go forth and utilize our resources to protect
our nation. Period.

It is inexplicable to me how any terrorist people can possibly justify
the lost of innocent lives for whatever fanatic reasons they may harbor.


It’s making me feel so sad. I looking for something to hold on to:

Probably for the same reason researchers implant cancer in
animal to learn about the desease. Because people that do it
things the cause justify the means. It just that this time the
target is human.

Still If somebody could create a symbol that express more sadness then the
often used “;(” I would be using it now.

:frowning:> (

Miguel.


“inn.qnx.com” wrote:

Some people may say that they just have a different moral code. . . . i
simply don’t see that as acceptable. I find that idea repugnant. Please
tell me you don’t see it that way. . . What did thousands of people from all
different nations in the World Trade Center do that deserve to be the brunt
of some terrorist group? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. And they deserve to
be punished.

75

“Maynard Lanting” <mlanting@atsautomation.com> wrote in message
news:3b9e283d$1@ats2.sentex.ca…

It is incredibly annoying when someone postulates the arguement that
morality is subjective. There are some basic underlining morals that are
held true in all fundamental religions. Some off-shoots may stray a
little,
but regardless of their religions or upbringing, some things cannot be
excused.

I can train my dog to attack little children. When my dog begins
attacking
children, he should be put down (besides myself of course). Or I can read
the bible and see that it is written that God commanded Moses and Isreal
to
attack the Cananites and overtake the land of Canaan so that His work of
salvation could be done . . . that is Christ born in Bethlehem as earlier
forshadowed, so that we can see His work of salvation for everyone. I can
go about telling people what God personally told me, to kill and rape
anyone
whom i please. But don’t you touch me Igor, because it is part of my
religion. Who are you to tell me what morals are?

Please note the sarcasm, it was intentional.

I don’t really think that this is what you truely think, or is it?

If I remember it properly (feel free to correct): “I disagree with what
you’re saying but I am ready to fight for your right to say that”. Wasn’t
that a famous american thesis?

To make my own position clearer, yes I think that morale is subjective, at
least to some extent. There are common values indeed, but apparently every
morale system tends to include more than just that and impose whole package
on others. That inevitably sparks tensions which eventually may ignite
flames and those flames may burn whatever remains of even those values which
are common. Hatred and xenophobia are developed from ‘little things’.

I do not think however that people who do something grave to you should not
be punished, just because they have their own morale. After morale there’s
natural right to self-defense. So yes I think bloody maniacs who’re after
today’s attacks should be exterminated. May be they have their own morale,
may be they are just maniacs, sometimes it just comes down to ‘the stronger
will survive’, how ever sad that may be ;(

  • Igor
76

“Maynard Lanting” <mlanting@atsautomation.com> wrote in message
news:3b9e331d$1@ats2.sentex.ca…

“Mario Charest” <> mcharest@clipzinformatic.com> > wrote in message
news:9nlaf6$5mn$> 1@inn.qnx.com> …

I agree with Igor, many problem arise because most people think
their moral is better than other people moral. What you define
as common sense is totaly subjective, that I feel deeply about.

In the example of the dog, what about the dog’s moral.
From his point of view what he did was right. If he could;
he would not understand why he is being killed. He would
probably go on a rampage and kill everyone that is trying
to kill him. The problem would be that the dog would
also think that is moral is valid, never second guessing it.

An alien species could have a good laugh at seeing the dog kill
the child. We do kill dogs for medical reseach don’t we? So
it would be righteous that it works both way no???

Another alien species could notice that we
are destroying the environment, hunting animal for pleasure,
obliterate animal species, playing Quake and Unreal and decide
that we are immoral and wipe us off. Put I suspect they will
observe and then be on their way, letting us do what we do…


So, what are you saying then? It is ok for me to have a “vision” tonight,
simply part of my religion, and kill all say, oriental males, and rape all
oriental women because it is part of my religion?

You are the only one that should decide was is right or wrong for yourself.
What will you do with that power???

That since i don’t see it as morally wrong, you can’t punish me?

In a nut shell yes. But that is the choice I made, if you feel you need to
punish someone that doesn’t comply with your own moral that’s all very fine
too.

The dog analogy may have been a stretch, i see that now, as the alien one
is
a stretch as well. We are not relative aliens to each other. No matter
what religion or race, we all share common pains, ailments, sorrows etc.
I
go so far as to say sharing basic morals. And these MUST be upheld.

If that is what you beleive then go for it, I’ll help you if I can.

Or we are no more advanced than dogs.

LOL! in what way are we more advance then dogs???

77

Good for you, Mario…

-----Original Message-----
From: Mario Charest [mailto:mcharest@clipzinformatic.com]
Posted At: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 7:28 AM
Posted To: advocacy
Conversation: War
Subject: Re: War



“Mario Charest” <mcharest@clipzinformatic.com> wrote in message
news:9nl65p$33v$1@inn.qnx.com…

“Stacey Abshire” <> sabshire@yahoo.com> > wrote in message
news:> 3B9E17D3.4040906@yahoo.com> …
Well, what do you pascifists think about the WTC being hit, and also
the
Pentagon by planes… highly unlikely that these are random
crashes…


So now you want to talk about it > :wink: > I think it’s sad very sad for
lack

of

better words. That won’t make me lose faith in the goodness of
humanity.

I

don’t think vengence will do any good, it would just show to the
people

that

did this that they were right to do so. People will want vengence,
unfortunately and the cycle will continue. But that’s easy for me to
say,
right. I haven’t received a “bomb” on my head, nor did the people
that

are

important in my life.

Tonight when I get back from home, I will hog my wife and kids. I will
show to my kids what are the results of intolerance and violence. I
will
tell them about the dead people, about the unimaginable suffering this
incident cause. I hope they will be moved, touched deep down in their
heart I hope this will leave an imprint they will remember for their
life
time.
I hope they will understand the consequences of violence and choose
never to follow that path.

78

ok, i see your line of thinking then. What i don’t see is how a country can
run on those guidelines however. Although i suppose that the rules would
then consist of the best possible compromise of the constituents morals and
values. Hmm.

Your ideas of morality are very individualistic i notice. What do you
believe is the proper response if China attacks Taiwan? Its ok, let them
figure it out because Taiwan has violated China’s sense of morality? Maybe
the Chinese think that proper punishment is to randomly kill say, every
third person. But that is ok to because they believe this to be right and
just? No sarcasm here, i’m just trying to understand.

Or maybe you mean that one can do what one believes moral, and it is up to
the one offended to do the punishing, because after all, as you say:

You are the only one that should decide was is right or wrong for
yourself.
What will you do with that power???

I believe that we are more advanced than dogs, and i do know about the
social structure of dogs in both the wild and at home from living for the
first 18 years on a very rural farm in Canada. We do not tolerate tyranny,
we have very technological ways of treating injuries, even to those whom we
don’t know, at least in Canada we have health care for all. We allow
everyone to marry those whom love, as long as they love us as well, and
desire the same matrimonial state as ourselves (think if we were dogs, Mike
Tyson would have a huge harem of terrified women). This is simply some
examples among others i’m sure.



“Mario Charest” <mcharest@clipzinformatic.com> wrote in message
news:9nln5s$cso$1@inn.qnx.com…

So, what are you saying then? It is ok for me to have a “vision”
tonight,
simply part of my religion, and kill all say, oriental males, and rape
all
oriental women because it is part of my religion?

You are the only one that should decide was is right or wrong for
yourself.
What will you do with that power???

That since i don’t see it as morally wrong, you can’t punish me?

In a nut shell yes. But that is the choice I made, if you feel you need
to
punish someone that doesn’t comply with your own moral that’s all very
fine
too.


The dog analogy may have been a stretch, i see that now, as the alien
one
is
a stretch as well. We are not relative aliens to each other. No matter
what religion or race, we all share common pains, ailments, sorrows etc.
I
go so far as to say sharing basic morals. And these MUST be upheld.

If that is what you beleive then go for it, I’ll help you if I can.

Or we are no more advanced than dogs.

LOL! in what way are we more advance then dogs???

\

79

“Stacey Abshire” <sabshire@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3B9E17D3.4040906@yahoo.com…

Well, what do you pascifists think about the WTC being hit, and also the
Pentagon by planes… highly unlikely that these are random crashes…

Only one: corresponding structures have a poor or at least unsufficient
security systems. But frankly, imho it has a very little common with both as
war itself as also with military.

But just don’t get me wrong. I have lot enough of friends and intimates
living in USA including NY and take all happened close to myself. Thanks god
they were not touched by this accidents. But for someone else this day
probably was the worsets day in their life and i can only pay respect to
them. And if it were in my hands i would take all possibly efforts this
would never happened again no matter where in which country and with whom.

But returning back to the question, designing systems for security/control
tasks and military imo is a way different things. The last ones by default
are designed for massive people KILLs when first are more likely to prevent
others from doing that.

// wbr

80

Maynard Lanting wrote:

ok, i see your line of thinking then. What i don’t see is how a country can
run on those guidelines however. Although i suppose that the rules would
then consist of the best possible compromise of the constituents morals and
values. Hmm.

Your ideas of morality are very individualistic i notice. What do you
believe is the proper response if China attacks Taiwan? Its ok, let them
figure it out because Taiwan has violated China’s sense of morality? Maybe
the Chinese think that proper punishment is to randomly kill say, every
third person. But that is ok to because they believe this to be right and
just? No sarcasm here, i’m just trying to understand.

I believe what he meant (and what i think) is that the concept of morale
being subjective works both ways. Not only America should not impose its
morale on others, but other are also not entitled to impose their morale
on the rest of world. If somebody tries to do so forcefully then you
have every right to defend yourself and your own morale. Dog trained to
kill children would be killed, whatever it thinks of itself. And so
should happen to people forcing jetliners to fly into skycrapers,
whatever their reasons and morale values are.

For all I know justification of people driving those planes would be
that by killing ‘unfaithful’ they are ‘freeing’ their souls and letting
them return to the ‘true God’, so it’s not a sin but a good deed and
them ‘mortars’ will go straight to heaven. For these people human life
is not all that precious gift at all, ‘life after’ is much more
important which is why they can kill lot of people so easily and why it
is relatively easy to find suicide attackers among them.

Well, their masterminds should not have any problems to join them in
‘heaven’, should they? Somebody’s got to do ‘good deed’ for them…

Or maybe you mean that one can do what one believes moral, and it is up to
the one offended to do the punishing, because after all, as you say:
You are the only one that should decide was is right or wrong for
yourself.
What will you do with that power???

I believe that we are more advanced than dogs, and i do know about the
social structure of dogs in both the wild and at home from living for the
first 18 years on a very rural farm in Canada.

I don’t own a dog, but …

Here’s a little thought for the day…
If you can start the day without caffeine;
If you can get along without pep pills;
If you can resist complaining and boring people with your troubles;
If you can eat the same food every day and be grateful for it;
If you can understand when your loved ones are too busy to give you
any time;
If you can take criticism and blame without resentment;
If you can ignore a friend’s limited education and never correct
him/her;
If you can resist treating a rich friend better than a poor friend;
If you can face the world without lies and deceit;
If you can relax without liquor;
If you can sleep without the aid of drugs;
If you can honestly say that deep in your heart you have no
prejudice
against creed, color, religion, gender preference, or politics,
THEN…
You have ALMOST reached the same level of development
as your dog.

We do not tolerate tyranny,
we have very technological ways of treating injuries, even to those whom we
don’t know, at least in Canada we have health care for all. We allow
everyone to marry those whom love, as long as they love us as well, and
desire the same matrimonial state as ourselves (think if we were dogs, Mike
Tyson would have a huge harem of terrified women). This is simply some
examples among others i’m sure.

Personally I think marriage has very little to do with laws and those
law are very much a rudiment of old era. AFAIK, Vermont state still has
law against ‘fornication’, lol :wink:

  • igor