05-03-2009, 03:48 PM | #11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
|
Quote:
The drones have precision bombs which are designed to inflict as little collateral damage as possible while still eliminating their target. Tactical nuclear weapons are the opposite of that. They have a blast radius that is generally much larger than what is necessary for the completion of a mission, resulting in many deaths of non-targets, as well as the spread of radiation afterward. In short, other than the fact that both can kill people, they have almost nothing in common. What is your point anyways? How did you even get onto this issue in a thread about torture (which you have already agreed you despise)? |
|
05-03-2009, 07:47 PM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,016
|
So now you resort to denigration. Enlightenment is an interesting subject but ultimately has nothing to do with this discussion. I've narrowed the question and your refusal to answer can only be construed to mean that you have not thought this situation through. By the way ranting and raving is not enlightenment -- it's noise.
|
05-03-2009, 08:00 PM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,016
|
Quote:
Honestly, I am appaled by the idea of torture, yet I willfully give my full support to the military to hunt down and kill Bin Laden (as do you and Mike based upon the history of discussions here). The more I think about it I have to ask what is the difference? Is there a difference? This has lead me to the conclusion that the moment one engages in differentiation, one becomes what one wants to despise in the opening comments of this thread. In other words, mike, you and myself are no different than Bybee, we just prefer not to use the exact same methods, but our methods are no less heinous. Last edited by tooblue; 05-03-2009 at 08:03 PM. |
|
05-03-2009, 09:40 PM | #14 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
|
Quote:
War is to be abhorred, but it may be, from time to time, necessary. Even so, while engaged in the conduct of war, certain ethical behavior is still required of us. We are not permitted to do whatever we fancy in a war to other people simply because they are on the other side of a conflict from us. As sad as the reality of war is, that does not give us a permit to degrade the human form or defile the temple of God however we see fit. God has permitted war in many circumstances, so long as the was is being fought with righteous desires. I challenge you to find one single solitary example of God condoning torture or the debasement of the human body. |
|
05-03-2009, 09:58 PM | #15 | ||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,016
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by tooblue; 05-03-2009 at 10:01 PM. |
||||||
05-03-2009, 10:03 PM | #16 |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,367
|
Cali don't even bother. It's like talking to a kindergartener, and not one with wisdom such as "out of the mouth of babes".
Tooblue needs to crack open his Book of Mormon. |
05-03-2009, 10:07 PM | #17 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,016
|
Thank you captain enlightenment. We are all grateful you're here to provide us cheese and crackers.
|
05-04-2009, 12:44 AM | #18 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
|
Quote:
I can't even begin to fathom the absurdity of those claims. Imagine this: 2 people, both with the goal to make money. In your world, they are now the same person, even if one of them is Bernie Madoff and the other is a guy who works hard every day of his life for an honest wage. I would hope you could differentiate between the two. Furthermore, where do you get your assumption that everyone tortured dies, or that the purpose of torturing them is to kill them? Didn't you just vote for a guy who was tortured (and who lived)? The means are frequently as, if not more, relevant to a determination of righteousness as the ends. And I totally reject as false your premise that war is never righteous. If that were the case, the unrighteous could oppress at will, and the righteous could never fight back because that action would be de facto immoral. I also reject your premise that killing is always wrong and that there are never any exceptions. Self-defense? War? Are you suggesting that everyone who has ever killed anyone else has broken the commandment of "thou shalt not kill?" The scriptures chalk that up as a pretty serious crime. You may want to inform some of our prophets who have served in war, or the veterans in your ward, or the person who falls asleep at the wheel of a car and inadvertently swerves into another car, killing the driver. Get real, Tooblue. You are living in an imaginary world. |
|
05-04-2009, 01:25 AM | #19 |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,367
|
If you read this site, you are aware that I have made preparations to defend myself and my family. We are instructed that we are to "stop" those that are threatening our lives.
And somehow, this is the same as people who would torture other human beings? See, I don't want to get in these conversations because I don't have the patience for it. If you are such that you have come to this conclusion already, assuming you are older than 15, there is no helping you. |
05-04-2009, 02:49 AM | #20 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,016
|
Quote:
The reality is anyone that kills another human will stand before the judgment bar and answer for what they have done. God will then weigh righteousness or circumstances accordingly, not man. So, all your hyperbole about telling that and this to so and so is erroneous. It will be up to God to decide. All we can do is endeavor to keep the commandment. And if we decided that is not possible and kill in self defense or fight in a war we must be prepared to answer for what we have done and accept God's judgment. Furthermore, any attempt to justify one violent action over another renders you the same as Jay Bybee etc. It is that simple. You are the one living in an imaginary world where you believe you can assign ethics to killing, and moralize one violent act over another. |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|