moralist

How do you know murder is wrong?

Recommended Posts

BaalChatzaf    0
3 hours ago, atlashead said:

Dagny was in the right killing the soldier.

Dagny did not kill a soldier  defending his home and hearth.  She killed a thug involved in wrongful violent acts.   Dagny was part of a commando operation intended to save an innocent man from violence.  She killed on of the "bad guys".  Unfortunately, Rand crafted the scene so it looked like Dagny killed the thug because he could not make up his mind. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wolf DeVoon    0
44 minutes ago, BaalChatzaf said:

She killed a thug involved in wrongful violent acts... Unfortunately, Rand crafted the scene so it looked like Dagny killed the thug because he could not make up his mind. 

Unfortunately, you have it backwards. She killed a uniformed LEO, a cop on duty, baffled him with bullshit and shot him.

Why do you always get everything completely wrong? Oh, duh, you already explained why. <_<

Quote

Life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. When a slaveowner strikes the eye of a male or female slave, destroying it, the owner shall let the slave go, a free person, to compensate for the eye. If the owner knocks out a tooth of a male or female slave, the slave shall be let go, a free person, to compensate for the tooth. When an ox gores a man or a woman to death, the ox shall be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall not be liable. If the ox has been accustomed to gore in the past, and its owner has been warned but has not restrained it, and it kills a man or a woman, the ox shall be stoned, and its owner also shall be put to death. If a ransom is imposed on the owner, then the owner shall pay whatever is imposed for the redemption of the victim’s life. If it gores a boy or a girl, the owner shall be dealt with according to this same rule. If the ox gores a male or female slave, the owner shall pay to the slaveowner thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brant Gaede    1
7 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

Dagny did not kill a soldier  defending his home and hearth.  She killed a thug involved in wrongful violent acts.   Dagny was part of a commando operation intended to save an innocent man from violence.  She killed on of the "bad guys".  Unfortunately, Rand crafted the scene so it looked like Dagny killed the thug because he could not make up his mind. 

It was just the obverse of the end of We the Living. All that talking was Rand's main point--the not making up the mind, the not taking responsibility, the not putting oneself first, the not thinking. The mindless guard.

In a real operation he would have been simply shot dead without all that palaver which was verbal analogous to the action of bursting into the guards' rec. room in a display of mythical heroes in action. In real life you'd throw in a bunch of stun grenades first then kill whoever was still crawling around.

--Brant

it-is-fiction--fiction inside fiction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BaalChatzaf    0
11 hours ago, Wolf DeVoon said:

Unfortunately, you have it backwards. She killed a uniformed LEO, a cop on duty, baffled him with bullshit and shot him.

Why do you always get everything completely wrong? Oh, duh, you already explained why. <_<

 

She killed the guy because he couldn't make up his mind.  In a real raid she just would have (or should have)  shot him dead.  In a real war one achieves the mission objective  even if blood must flow. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
atlashead    0

Dagny was taxed and enslaved by the government, he was on a government paycheck.  Dagny was the last prime mover paying taxes, I don't think it says whether Dagny believes in military force, but I doubt she even gave her consent-the government, in effect, if I'm correct, raped her financially.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wolf DeVoon    0
3 hours ago, atlashead said:

Dagny was taxed and enslaved by the government, he was on a government paycheck.  Dagny was the last prime mover paying taxes, I don't think it says whether Dagny believes in military force, but I doubt she even gave her consent-the government, in effect, if I'm correct, raped her financially.

Get the rape metaphor out of that, think more clearly. Dagny and a lot of other people pay taxes, then and now. Cops are employed by government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brant Gaede    1
3 hours ago, atlashead said:

Dagny was taxed and enslaved by the government, he was on a government paycheck.  Dagny was the last prime mover paying taxes, I don't think it says whether Dagny believes in military force, but I doubt she even gave her consent-the government, in effect, if I'm correct, raped her financially.

I don't think "rape" should be so broadly used. The word is too full of evil.

--Brant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
moralist    0
On ‎5‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 5:27 PM, Wolf DeVoon said:

Well. So much for murder.

Most murders are fully deserved self inflicted self destructs. nodder.gif

Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wolf DeVoon    0
6 minutes ago, moralist said:

Most murders are fully deserved self inflicted self destructs.

Greg

You've gone off the deep end, tootsie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brant Gaede    1
58 minutes ago, moralist said:

Most murders are fully deserved self inflicted self destructs. nodder.gif

Greg

For once I can't begin to figure you out.

--Brant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
moralist    0
13 hours ago, Brant Gaede said:

For once I can't begin to figure you out.

--Brant

It's actually quite simple, Brant.

Secularists don't understand that when people do to each other they do to themselves because what they do to others returns to them.

It has always been this way... it is this way... and it will always be this way.

Whoever can figure this out will bless their life with happiness simply by giving up angrily blaming (unjustly accusing) others for the suffering they inflict upon themselves..

Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wolf DeVoon    0
7 hours ago, moralist said:

It's actually quite simple, Brant.

Secularists don't understand that when people do to each other they do to themselves because what they do to others returns to them.

It has always been this way... it is this way... and it will always be this way.

Whoever can figure this out will bless their life with happiness simply by giving up angrily blaming (unjustly accusing) others for the suffering they inflict upon themselves..

Greg

If true, no need for cops, courts of justice, armed forces, legislation. Brilliant as usual, doofus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BaalChatzaf    0
23 hours ago, Brant Gaede said:

For once I can't begin to figure you out.

--Brant

Don't even try.... Moralist is permanently beyond comprehension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
moralist    0
1 hour ago, Wolf DeVoon said:

If true, no need for cops, courts of justice, armed forces, legislation. Brilliant as usual, doofus.

You don't actually think about what you write, do you Wolf? 

 The things you mentioned are just part of how what you do returns to you. Besides those, there are also many other ways for you to get exactly what you deserve as the consequences of your own actions. Everything you did returned to you. It's your own damned fault and no one else's.

 

Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
moralist    0
1 hour ago, BaalChatzaf said:

Don't even try....

Bob is simple to figure out... government educated to be a bureaucratic teat sucker.   :P

 

Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wolf DeVoon    0
6 minutes ago, moralist said:

You don't actually think about what you write, do you Wolf?

Certainly true that one of us is incapable of thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
moralist    0
58 minutes ago, Wolf DeVoon said:

Certainly true that one of us is incapable of thinking.

You still chose not to realize that legalisms are only a part of how what you do returns to you. And even that denial itself set into motion consequences you fully deserved... just as my affirmation of that same truth set into motion consequences I fully deserved.

So although the same law applies equally to both of us... the difference between what each of us got in our lives is the result of each of us living by two different sets of moral values.

Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wolf DeVoon    0
39 minutes ago, moralist said:

You still chose not to realize that legalisms are only a part of how what you do returns to you. And even that denial itself set into motion consequences you fully deserved... just as my affirmation of that same truth set into motion consequences I fully deserved.

So although the same law applies equally to both of us... the difference between what each of us got in our lives is the result of each of us living by two different sets of moral values.

Greg

Please, honeybun, don't even try. You end up sounding like a child who doesn't understand the meaning of terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
moralist    0
12 hours ago, Wolf DeVoon said:

Please, honeybun, don't even try. You end up sounding like a child who doesn't understand the meaning of terms.

Your vapid empty contentless responses give you away, wolf.

I got your number. You got nothing. nodder.gif

Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now