The Talmud encourages Jews to commit all manner of criminal activity without fear of punishment, but the Jewish Encyclopedia states that the penalty for Gentiles who violate even one of the 7 Noahide Laws is death.

submitted by Jesus from (self.conspiracy)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ctvzbuxr 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Again, there is a difference between personal taste and ethics.
I can, for example, explain why rape is wrong. You can not want to be raped, because rape implies that the act is involuntary, therefore, in order to accept that rape is morally good, you would have to accept that rape is both bad (as done to you) and good (as done to others) at the same time. That is not a coherent position, and therefore illogical. Therefore, arguing for rape to be ethical is impossible.
You can make the same argument about things like murder, assault, theft, etc. But you cannot make the same argument about trans poeple or polyamory. When it comes to bestiality, animals are not protected by morality the same way a more intelligent creature would be. If it is ok to kill an animal for food, then it is (morally) ok to fuck it (though, again, I find it disgusting and would never encourage it).
The ultimate goal in every person's life is happyness. Happyness is the only goal that we don't persue in order to achieve something else. Some poeple are happy when they hack their penis off. And while I may not agree with this, I do not have the right to stand in the way of their happiness, nor am I in a position to decide for them what makes them happy. I just don't think children should have their mind poisoned by this stuff.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I thoroughly disagree with much of what you say. The ultimate goal of your life may be happiness, but it ain't mine. "It's all about them feel-goods, eh?" Don't project that waste onto me. I'm perfectly fine with life being up and down, good and bad, constantly changing between neutrals and extremes. I don't pursue happiness, and if you are, or if these trans people are, then it's no wonder that people like me are so against it all. It's no wonder that trans people tend to be very depressed and isolated, even if they are surrounded by bleeding hearts who accept their every whim. I'm not convinced its ethical to eat meat. I don't see how can you jump from "if you can eat it, you can fuck it." that's not logical. We haven't even agreed on whether or not its ok to kill an animal to eat it, so don't go jumping to its ok to fuck it. Morality and ethics can be super overlapped, and social perspectives heavily change the things that society thinks as "right" or "wrong". However, my argument, as is the argument of many philosophers, is that there is a base wisdom to morality and ethics, and every time a society moves away from this base wisdom in the name of "ethical progress", it destroys family units, long-standing communities, and proven-philosophies which will inevitably arise again in later generations to fight the new "norm". I don't support your moral relativism. It can be logically refuted, and, in fact, this discussion we are in right now is the same discussion philosophers have been debating for centuries, ever since Christianity started losing its place as top dog. If everyone in the world agreed that rape is good, people like you would say "yep, consensus is in, rape is good." I say that good = life-affirming and bad = life-negating. Those concepts are easy to understand, and can be used as lenses on all situations. Does rape produce states of being which are life-affirming for ALL parties, or life-negating for ANY parties? I think the answer is easy there, its life-negating. This way of perception includes relativity, because relativity can help with sympathetic understanding, but it doesn't treat relativity like the God's Tool so many modernists think it is.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It is ethical to eat animals, since they recognize that their bodies are food for others. But not all animals. Certainly dogs are dismayed by the barbaric practice of eating them.

[–]Jesus[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

God, only renounced animal eating prior to the flood, afterward, when the Eluid and Nephilim fell, God made it no sin for men to eat meat. Understand, that when I eat meat, and so too, do many societies have to, like the Eskimos to survive, I do it with the neat of intentions. None of them are abused and they have a good life; all enviormentally friendly. I see a lot pg Vegans talk about how great they are but don't realize half the crap they eat is not organic and sprayed with pesticides and industrialozed coe fertilizer that is more concern to the environment than small local organic ranging and farming.

Moral relativity is a sham. There is only one objective truth and subjective love. Solzhenitsyn was right to attack relativity.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This is what vegans and vegetarians sponsor through their "EAT PLANTS! SAVE LIVES!" delusion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2Pyu-Cj0gg

And this is the organic version. The chemical warfare one is much uglier, if a lot less visible.

I eat organic carnivore. It's the only diet I can live off of, for all its great financial cost. It's also the only diet known to not cause the diseases of civilization.