Candidus said:
A human being is a survival engine. Your nature compels you to take whatever course of action has the most survival value at any given time. If the alternative to stealing is starving, go ahead and steal. If the alternative to fighting and killing an aggressor is letting him stab you in the neck, go ahead and kill him. In either case, you have certainly done nothing morally wrong..
Thanks for taking my words and putting them in a box. Hmm, context and hypotheticals , always interesting things to play with. Well here is the box my words were originally in. People, such as us, are more or less living decent lives. If we are starving, we have options and alternatives other than stealing. We have family, friends and organizations to help us. Besides, in a true survival setting the concept of stealing would not apply.
If someone drives up to Bi-Lo in their nice car, walk up to and break the front windows in their comfortable cloths, walk in, grab a loaf of bread and try to walk out, that is stealing. However, if the nuclear apocalypse just happened and they're dragging their broken body covered in the shredded rags that is left of their clothing to reach whatever food that maybe left in the collapsing Bi-Lo, I don't think anyone alive would care or accuse them of stealing.
If, IF we are ever assaulted, (which has actually happened to me) we have options. We can defend without killing or we can evade. Besides how often is someone after your neck with a knife? Yet, for you I guess I should have been specific. Thou shall not
murder. Is that better? Fighting and, in the unfortunate circumstance of killing in self-defense is not an act of murder.
Heh, you speak of a survivalist attitude but I can promise you that if you ever have to survive in the conditions that you're day-dreaming of, smashing the windows of you local Bi-Lo will be the least of your worries.
As for screwing your sibling, that's not a moral issue whatsoever except for where it results in conception of a child. If a couple of siblings decide to have a relationship with each other, and decide with good reason *not* to have a child (although they could adopt), go ahead and try to tell me at what stage you get the right to interfere?
As I said in the post above, there's nothing more disgusting than when people bandy up together with their wild rolling eyes and frothing mouths, and get meddling in the affairs of other people that in no way affect them. Awful.
There is nothing more disgusting than a person with their rolling eyes, frothing mouths and verbal assaults, meddles in the affairs of other people that in no way affects them. Simply awful.
This is a thread where anyone can share their opinion as long as they do not attempt to attack others with their words. The thread creator asked for the opinions of anyone who wished to post. I posted my opinion and gave reasons for my opinion. I never commanded anyone to do as I say. I never said that my words are a law that must be followed. I never said I needed to stop or control someone's actions. So, please, tell me how I was "interfering." Please, enlighten me of my meddlesome methods. While you're trying to figure that one out, let me enlighten you.
You have quoted my post and while probably frothing at the mouth, have committed the very act you accuse me of. You targeted my post only to pick a fight, tried to skew my words and did not leave anything of intellectual or at least conversational worth towards the topic as the creator of this thread has asked. Well keep on roaring and banging your club as trolls do. I've no more words to waste on you.