I would agree that there are moral facts under utilitarianism. Although, there still isn't any objective reason to follow utilitarianism. But what happens when the majority of society no longer values the same happiness we value (say there is a large Darwinist movement who want to replace the idea that happiness is the most important human value with some sort of power struggle idealism)? Is it ethical to change society in order to benefit this new majority, and in doing so overthrowing those same ethics that permitted the revolution?

And another question, what about those who aren't as conscious as the rest of the population? Is their ethical opinion still important? Or should they be treated as animals in relation to morality (I'm assuming you'll agree that consciousness is more important than one's species). But what if an alien race with greater numbers than our own sought us? And what if they believed in our eradication? Are we really going to believe, as humans, that it is ethical to allow them to eradicate us simply because they have the majority and they find happiness in our eradication?

Maybe I'm understanding you wrong; maybe you're not talking about utilitarianism. In which case it would make sense that the reason you want grounded moral facts is to prevent this emotionally distraught fallacy within utilitarianism that bases our ethics off a majority. I still can't agree that there is anything objective to idealizing pleasure over suffering, but if we make that one non-objective exception, we can find moral facts that would follow from that idealism. Because if we did encounter a situation in which the majority didn't agree with idealizing pleasure over suffering, I certainly wouldn't sit quietly while they tore down our old society.

You know that that site is fake, right? They had a story about TES VI like two weeks ago.

How am I supposed to know? It was just the first thing that popped up on Google.

Lol why are they raiding /r9k/? Everyone there is already on the verge of suicide.

Isn't the point of that board to be edgy or something?

He looks like Marcus Fenix

He needs to look more like Fenix IMO.

okey hopefully this isn't too hard

gimme my share of insults

Wasn't he supposed to be really pale with short red hair and freckles?

Master Chief has a soul though

According to 343i, he's supposed to look most like Clint Eastwood. Putting together all of the tease photos of the Master Cheif's face combined with the book descriptions, they were able to come up with this.


So what do you think?

Here's the Halo Follower video on it:

http://defenseforceof.tumblr.com/
http://thewarof2015ishere.tumblr.com/



IBS HABBENING


http://boards.4chan.org/b/thread/590397858/baton-down-the-hatches-faggots-a-shit-storm-is

spam with what? Traps/gay sex, nigger cock/cucking, feminism posts? We already get that and everything else offensive to sane people from our own side.

Considering /b/ is like 40% trollers, and 20% steady stream of newfags coming here for le memes they saw on Reddit, I doubt any spam will really effect the core 40%.

This is a website where people consider themselves and everyone else fags regardless of sexual preference, unless they are going to hack the site, spamming isn't going to do much, other than making the site a littler gayer.

And if they spam /b/ with gore or cheese pizza or insult users like 4chan did to Tumblr, a lot of fags might just think /b/ is good again.

I appreciate the effort but literally everything can be justified in some way or another. All you're doing is giving the opportunity for the religious to defend their beliefs, win (not be convinced by your arguments), and be further dug into their beliefs.

noelle left

sandtrap died (probably)

Is anarchy even open yet

I can't see it

you fucking retard

If you read the OP closely you'll realize that this thread is bait

Linky: http://sep7agon.net/index.php?action=admin

I'm really stuck between a rock and a hard place on this one. It seems like a lot of people nowadays no longer support Israel, and on the internet I'd say maybe half of the people don't support them. But the other half of the internet still supports Israel, and both sides defend their countries rather zealously compared to other international issues. But because we have halves rather than a majority and a minority of support, it makes it pretty much impossible for me to figure out which side of the fight to join. I want to say that Israel needs to burn to the ground, but I also want to recognize Palestine for the terrorists they are. Can you guys help me figure out which side to support? I really can't figure it out without taking the moral high ground that the liberals have control over.