SR 39: Where Every Post Is Oozing Happiness

I rather like that quote.  You could follow it up with a good, hearty "nobody cares" too.

"stonie don't bring that relativist sh*t in here and vompatti stop being such a goddamn communist I'm going to bed peace out, hippie fags"  -Henry Plainview

aginor wrote: stonebeard wrote: aginor wrote: I care far ot much personaly to not care at all, that is what drives me Oh please. You can try to take any perceived moral high ground you want and I won't stop you, but don't delude yourself into thinking you're acting morally superior to anyone else because you're taking a side typically associated with compassionate liberalism. Much as you'd like to believe your ethical guidepost is grounded in something objective, we all only stand by our own ethics when we unreasonably appeal to our own intuition. In the end, and there is no truly objective way for people to assess the validity of other's ethical systems. It will always inevitably involve and appeal to populism or what was historically the norm.    I might do so on the internett, but not in person if youd met me, but yes i can be as moral and rightous as i want to on the internet, becouse i want that image to be most present,  i want to be seen as reliable and a kind person, not that i am, i am not saying i am not flawed in any way, i am very much so, i have been releyd on social service most of my life, from school with additional teachers and assistance, with extended high school, with work training to get my confidence in work situations to be better, to be honus yes i am quite willing to act moraly strong and kind to most people and it is not even a cover, but i am also very insecure individual, who is terrified into going for jobinterviews, to confront a jobb to get a jobb, i get so nerovus i almost faint, my pulse raises, i start to hyperventilate and don't see straight, but contrary to that is that i am also (as strange as it may sound) stuborn as a goat, with myself i am very very very slefcritical to the point of being to selfloathing which my parents often says it often overdone,.  i don't say i am ona moral highground but i try to be as good as i can be in reason ofcourse, all have its limits it is not that i am serious all the time (i rearly are in public ) i am a clown, but also a lamb or  a boiling geysire (spelling),  and a the Hulk if my temper is tested, but also am very fragile like crystal,  I AM COMPLEX (mu hypocritical self) (and i am not 100% serious ether )

stonebeard wrote: aginor wrote: I care far ot much personaly to not care at all, that is what drives me Oh please. You can try to take any perceived moral high ground you want and I won't stop you, but don't delude yourself into thinking you're acting morally superior to anyone else because you're taking a side typically associated with compassionate liberalism. Much as you'd like to believe your ethical guidepost is grounded in something objective, we all only stand by our own ethics when we unreasonably appeal to our own intuition. In the end, and there is no truly objective way for people to assess the validity of other's ethical systems. It will always inevitably involve and appeal to populism or what was historically the norm.

I might do so on the internett, but not in person if youd met me, but yes i can be as moral and rightous as i want to on the internet, becouse i want that image to be most present,  i want to be seen as reliable and a kind person, not that i am, i am not saying i am not flawed in any way, i am very much so, i have been releyd on social service most of my life, from school with additional teachers and assistance, with extended high school, with work training to get my confidence in work situations to be better, to be honus yes i am quite willing to act moraly strong and kind to most people and it is not even a cover, but i am also very insecure individual, who is terrified into going for jobinterviews, to confront a jobb to get a jobb, i get so nerovus i almost faint, my pulse raises, i start to hyperventilate and don't see straight, but contrary to that is that i am also (as strange as it may sound) stuborn as a goat, with myself i am very very very slefcritical to the point of being to selfloathing which my parents often says it often overdone,.  i don't say i am ona moral highground but i try to be as good as i can be in reason ofcourse, all have its limits it is not that i am serious all the time (i rearly are in public ) i am a clown, but also a lamb or  a boiling geysire (spelling),  or the Hulk if my temper is tested, but also i can be very fragile like crystal,  I AM COMPLEX (my hypocritical self) (and i am not 100% serious ether )


Edited by aginor - August 19 2011 at 02:57

stonie don't bring that relativist sh*t in here and vompatti stop being such a goddamn communist I'm going to bed peace out, hippie fags

Vomps can you try to explain in one way how a carrot can represnt Ethics and that a wood with a nail on one side can represent Morals   if you are kind???? 

stonebeard wrote: Vompatti wrote: stonebeard wrote: Vompatti wrote: stonebeard wrote: Vompatti wrote: I'm surprised that so many people think of a jail sentence as a punishment instead of a practical method of keeping potentially harmful individuals away from the society until they can (if possible) be rehabilitated as productive citizens who make money for the state and the capitalist system. I don't particularly care about pumping a bunch of tax dollars into maybe possibly rehabilitating a bunch of maniac murderers.  Then again, the whole process of the death penalty takes a lot of time and money and effort too. Keeping the criminal in jail for the rest of his life often seems like the best solution. I'm not sure. It's more ambiguous for different crimes, but really...I should have to contribute tax money to keep a murderer alive for his entire life? That's what's happening? Sure there's a lot of ways to reduce taxes anyway, but the possibility of that ridiculous to me. In cases where there is overwhelming evidence that there was first-degree murder or a higher crime, the criminal, after appeal let's say, should probably be put to death in a very short time. Maybe a couple weeks, a month, whatever. But it's nonsense to have a society pay to keep a murderer alive, let alone for life.   I'm sure the costs of keeping the relatively limited amount of convicted murderers alive are not enormous compared the amount of money the American government invests on slaughtering innocent people. You're probably right. You should tell them to stop all that.

"Nobody cares." 

A Person wrote: I think we should make them criminals into astronauts.

Awwww 

stonebeard wrote: Vompatti wrote: stonebeard wrote: Vompatti wrote: I'm surprised that so many people think of a jail sentence as a punishment instead of a practical method of keeping potentially harmful individuals away from the society until they can (if possible) be rehabilitated as productive citizens who make money for the state and the capitalist system. I don't particularly care about pumping a bunch of tax dollars into maybe possibly rehabilitating a bunch of maniac murderers.  Then again, the whole process of the death penalty takes a lot of time and money and effort too. Keeping the criminal in jail for the rest of his life often seems like the best solution. I'm not sure. It's more ambiguous for different crimes, but really...I should have to contribute tax money to keep a murderer alive for his entire life? That's what's happening? Sure there's a lot of ways to reduce taxes anyway, but the possibility of that ridiculous to me. In cases where there is overwhelming evidence that there was first-degree murder or a higher crime, the criminal, after appeal let's say, should probably be put to death in a very short time. Maybe a couple weeks, a month, whatever. But it's nonsense to have a society pay to keep a murderer alive, let alone for life.

I'm sure the costs of keeping the relatively limited amount of convicted murderers alive are not enormous compared the amount of money the American government invests on slaughtering innocent people.

stonebeard wrote: Vompatti wrote: I'm surprised that so many people think of a jail sentence as a punishment instead of a practical method of keeping potentially harmful individuals away from the society until they can (if possible) be rehabilitated as productive citizens who make money for the state and the capitalist system. I don't particularly care about pumping a bunch of tax dollars into maybe possibly rehabilitating a bunch of maniac murderers.  Then again, the whole process of the death penalty takes a lot of time and money and effort too.

Keeping the criminal in jail for the rest of his life often seems like the best solution.