In my own life? I don't think I do.

As a society? I wish we did. Cultural relativism fucking irritates the shit out of me. Fucking social justice warriors without any sense of duty, morality, responsibility or objectivity. Hello people! Facts fucking exist.

Fucking fuckers.

Religious people generally don't pray because they want something, they do it as a means of  communion and faith.

Serious question.

Do you ever doubt your faith?

Seriously it's their life and if the one thing they really want to do in life is have sex with a kid then who am I to judge?

Judging people is fun.

Quote from: Meta Cognition on March 20, 2015, 01:45:37 PM

Quote from: challengerX on March 20, 2015, 01:40:21 PM

Clarify what you mean by "consequences".

.
The net result is more negative than positive.

Depriving that child of his promising life is not only an unnecessary theft of his own potential prosperity, but also his potential contribution to his community. The fact that a net loss has been made is the issue.

If the situation were exactly the same, but killing the kid would save one million people. It's clear that murdering him would positively be the moral thing to do.

Ok, agreed.

But what about a baby that is just average. Any random baby. Don't you agree killing the baby is wrong?

Of course, unless there are significantly good consequences that come from that baby's unfortunate death.

The random murder of a baby is clearly horrific.

Quote from: DemonicChronic on March 20, 2015, 01:16:08 PM

Probably that nothing is inherently wrong or right in a moral sense, and that whether or not any condition of suffering is 'wrong' is a matter of perspective.

So killing a healthy and happy baby with a promising future (sidestep out of that one smartasses) isn't inherently wrong?

This comes down to a confusion about the word "inherently".

There's nothing inherently wrong with killing a baby. It's precisely the parameters you've imposed (healthy, happy, promising future) which make it wrong. The consequences of killing a baby like that make it immoral. You can only ever judge actions in accordance with their motivations and consequences. Not some inherent factor which doesn't really exist.

We both agree it's wrong, but there's nothing special about the murder of an infant. It's just ridiculously immoral because of its horrible, horrible consequences.

You project so hard. And I have bad news for ya, I've already had my dick wet. So LOL once again you're all ego no substance

I swear to God your avatar fits any post you could ever make.

this thread

And people accuse me of ideological schizophrenia.

Fuck off, already.

Quote from: Mr Psychologist on March 18, 2015, 01:48:34 PM

- In order to boost North Sea oil exploration the petroleum revenue tax is now 35pc, down from 50pc.

So in pleb terms, this is going to make petrol even cheaper on top of the OPEC price war? <.<

It would depend on the companies producing the oil, they could lower their prices because the tax on their profits has been lowered or they could be greedy jews about it. Chances are the latter.

Higher profits are a good motivator for increasing investment. Which will increase supply.

Love a good bit of Sowell.

The only welfare programme you really need is a negative income tax.

A political ploy, but not too bad.

- In order to help first-time home buyers, savings set aside for a deposit will be topped up by the government by £50 for every £200, up to a maximum of £3,000.
- 95pc of savers will no longer pay savings tax.
- In order to boost North Sea oil exploration the petroleum revenue tax is now 35pc, down from 50pc.
- The bank levy has been raised to 0.21pc.
- Instead of a £23bn surplus by 2019, austerity is being eased and a £7.1bn forecast is being made.
- Clampdown on tax avoidance.
- Duty on petrol frozen.
- Tax-free personal allowance to raise to £11,000.

fixd

Quote from: Meta Cognition on March 17, 2015, 05:43:58 PM

Quote from: AngryBrute on March 17, 2015, 05:33:51 PM

then I would go to Officer Candidate School since I am a College grad. And the other is only if I got drafted...

If I were to join, theoretically, I don't think I could be a commissioned officer without combat experience.

If you were to join as a regular enlisted man then yeah thats the case. But College Grads have the opportunity to go into OCS once you complete Basic Training... So says my local recruiter.

It's the same for the British Army.

I'm saying that I, personally, wouldn't feel comfortable or responsible enough to lead men into combat before having been led myself.

I'm not sure there exists a condition or monetary value that could convince me to join the military.

Would you choose welfare over service?

I will be joining the military if I run out of options.

Army or welfare? I'll take the army.