Total Posts:82|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The Kind of People Who Make Me Smile

YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I find that as I get older, (leave it to a gay guy to start feeling old in his early 20s) I am less inclined to be enraged by things than I am to laugh at and passively judge them. Who are those people who amuse me? Social conservatives, blindly overzealous liberals, people who would seek to make abortion illegal, old crazy people, kids who say stupid things, all Tea Party Republicans, most hipsters, some (but not all) people who identify themselves as feminists, vegans, fundamentalist Muslims who seek to force the West to accommodate to their cultural depravity (this is more a problem in the UK than in the US), moral subjectivists, Young Earth Creationists, most philosophy majors, all homophobes, anti-interventionalists, most Libertarians, women who judge other women for not representing other women well, gays who hate on other gays for being gay, the morally superior, Southern Baptists, Bobby Jindal, Paul Ryan, anyone who proposes that creationism replace science in public schools, anyone who invokes multiculturalism as a value in defense of not saying our nation's pledge, people who insist on their kids being vegans if they are vegans, deep ecologists, people who pretend to victims in order to garner sympathy, American voters, atheists who b!tch about Christian religious displays at private businesses, all people who want to remove "In God We Trust" from US Currency, people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan, televangelists, mega-churches, religious figures who have not written books and are only "religious leaders" whose salary is greater than 100,000.00 USD, The NRA and all Second Amendment fanatics, Michael Moore, Al Gore, Glen Beck, Rush Limb., JFK conspiracy theorists, Global Warming Deniers, The John Birch Society, etc.

I could go on forever... and if I do I might as well have established the next set of Cards Against Humanity.

I'll talk about why these people amuse me, and what that means later. I'm tired now, but I can't sleep, so I thought I'd post something to take my mind off the frustration of not being able to sleep.

Peace out.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 3:19:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
CNN's news editors, The Koch brothers, anti-drug lobbyists, Mothers Against Destructive Decisions, those who believe businesses have a right to exploit workers, those who oppose a minimum wage of less than 15.00 USD/hr., economists of the Austrian school, people who derive economic theory and political philosophy from Ayn Rand, most people who talk about communism, most people who talk about economics, people who are afraid of me, people who complain about how mean I am, people who whine about not being socially accepted, all anti-bullying activists, anyone who tells a kid "violence is never the answer," etc.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 3:25:22 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Unions, anti-unionists, fast food executives who talk about politics, Kirk Cameron, Ron Paul, Rand Paul (fvck, can't remember if I've already mentioned him), people who oppose progressive income taxation, people who drive large and obnoxious trucks, anyone who defends the Confederate Flag as part of their cultural heritage...
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 3:32:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
All people who oppose universal health care, all people who oppose universal social security, all people who want to privatize social security because Republicans have bankrupted the enterprise, all people who want to privatize the post office, all people who oppose governmentally subsidized public education, all people who think that the US should return to a gold standard, all people who believe in UFO's, Jimmy Carter (who actually claims to have seen a UFO), Bill DeBlasio (who has blue balled New York's liberals), patent trolls, people who involve themselves in building management associations or home owners associations, people who think they offer insightful advice but always fail to do so, those who think free speech is absolute and so to an extent that it trumps moral principle, those who lack the ability to anticipate what impact their actions will have...
Tsar of DDO
ADreamOfLiberty
Posts: 1,570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 5:21:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 11:08:57 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Ridiculous.

Indeed. Especially the part about moral subjectivist. The only thing worse than a moral subjectivst is a moral subjectivist in denial who believes in moral absolutes.
LOL, yeah, it's pretty amazing how they think they can "reason" with you. - Sidewalker, speaking of advocates for sexual deviancy.

So, my advice, Liberty, is to go somewhere else. Leave, and never come back. - YYW

And that's what I did. Contact me at http://www.edeb8.com... by the same user name if you have anything you'd like to say.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 5:25:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 5:21:07 PM, ADreamOfLiberty wrote:
At 3/20/2014 11:08:57 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Ridiculous.

Indeed. Especially the part about moral subjectivist. The only thing worse than a moral subjectivst is a moral subjectivist in denial who believes in moral absolutes.

I didn't even pay attention, it's just a big ball of retarded projection.
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 5:31:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
I find that as I get older, (leave it to a gay guy to start feeling old in his early 20s) I am less inclined to be enraged by things than I am to laugh at and passively judge them. Who are those people who amuse me? Social conservatives, blindly overzealous liberals, people who would seek to make abortion illegal, old crazy people, kids who say stupid things, all Tea Party Republicans, most hipsters, some (but not all) people who identify themselves as feminists, vegans, fundamentalist Muslims who seek to force the West to accommodate to their cultural depravity (this is more a problem in the UK than in the US), moral subjectivists, Young Earth Creationists, most philosophy majors, all homophobes, anti-interventionalists, most Libertarians, women who judge other women for not representing other women well, gays who hate on other gays for being gay, the morally superior, Southern Baptists, Bobby Jindal, Paul Ryan, anyone who proposes that creationism replace science in public schools, anyone who invokes multiculturalism as a value in defense of not saying our nation's pledge, people who insist on their kids being vegans if they are vegans, deep ecologists, people who pretend to victims in order to garner sympathy, American voters, atheists who b!tch about Christian religious displays at private businesses, all people who want to remove "In God We Trust" from US Currency, people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan, televangelists, mega-churches, religious figures who have not written books and are only "religious leaders" whose salary is greater than 100,000.00 USD, The NRA and all Second Amendment fanatics, Michael Moore, Al Gore, Glen Beck, Rush Limb., JFK conspiracy theorists, Global Warming Deniers, The John Birch Society, etc.

I could go on forever... and if I do I might as well have established the next set of Cards Against Humanity.

I'll talk about why these people amuse me, and what that means later. I'm tired now, but I can't sleep, so I thought I'd post something to take my mind off the frustration of not being able to sleep.

Peace out.

Why do pro-lifers make you laugh?
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
xXCryptoXx
Posts: 5,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 8:48:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Because judging people with views that are different than yours in a smug, superior fashion is certainly the way to live life.
Nolite Timere
tulle
Posts: 4,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd
yang.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 10:10:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



http://tardaasa.webcomic.ws...
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 10:42:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

It's the fact that people in the West are so horrifically out of touch with the rest of the world that spending money making sure that dogs are happy instead of helping people around the world (or in their own backyard!) who are suffering far worse fates doesn't even stir their indolent sense of moral indignation.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 10:44:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 10:42:57 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

It's the fact that people in the West are so horrifically out of touch with the rest of the world that spending money making sure that dogs are happy instead of helping people around the world (or in their own backyard!) who are suffering far worse fates doesn't even stir their indolent sense of moral indignation.

Dogs have feelings too, you know. Sure, the priorities might not be right, but it's still a positive thing she's doing.
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 10:50:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

There's actually nothing wrong with her... it's just that her commercials come on all the time.
Tsar of DDO
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 10:58:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 10:50:07 PM, YYW wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

There's actually nothing wrong with her... it's just that her commercials come on all the time.

Maybe the issue is important?
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 11:07:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 10:58:11 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:50:07 PM, YYW wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

There's actually nothing wrong with her... it's just that her commercials come on all the time.

Maybe the issue is important?

Yeah, it is.
Tsar of DDO
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 11:07:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 10:44:57 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:42:57 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

It's the fact that people in the West are so horrifically out of touch with the rest of the world that spending money making sure that dogs are happy instead of helping people around the world (or in their own backyard!) who are suffering far worse fates doesn't even stir their indolent sense of moral indignation.

Dogs have feelings too, you know. Sure, the priorities might not be right, but it's still a positive thing she's doing.

So do plants, in a sense. But resources are limited, so redirecting them (the ones involved here are both the money donated to and time spent on such causes) in a less than optimal way does hurt people. I'm sure bicyclists get uncomfortable while riding, and I'm sure that me spending my money buying them free seats may be seen as a 'nice' thing to do, until the bigger picture, and opportunity costs, come into focus.

For an example of the sort of thing which is a more deserving recipient of our attention: in one ethnic cleansing between Armenia and Azerbaijan, an entire village was wiped out. One reporter escaped with footage, before the military rolled in, of a young girl and old woman, both strangled with barbed wire. The girl, just barely alive, was struggling to cling to what I can only assume was the corpse of her grandmother. I can guarantee that Americans have shed more dears for a cat with a droopy eye than they have for that girl, or the thousands like her who die brutally. They can't even take the time to inform themselves of the fact that their government often supported and supports such displays, in Central America, the Middle East, and East Timor, for example. One groups of rebels funded and armed by our government made a habit of butchering entire villages, and leaving the corpses of family members with their throats slit, and their tongues pulled out through the wound for the survivors to find. The fact that people in my country remain ignorant of this, that they refuse to look into what they sanction with their tax money, and then think that they deserve to feel morally upright sickens me. They spent the time that they could have spent educating themselves and performing what should be every citizen's civic duty (to inform oneself) volunteering at an animal shelter, and then continue to live their cushioned lives with a blithe sense of self-righteousness. Seeing ads like this just touches that nerve quite directly.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
kbub
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 11:08:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 10:58:11 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:50:07 PM, YYW wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

There's actually nothing wrong with her... it's just that her commercials come on all the time.

Maybe the issue is important?

^What she said.
kbub
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 11:12:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 11:07:04 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:44:57 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:42:57 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

It's the fact that people in the West are so horrifically out of touch with the rest of the world that spending money making sure that dogs are happy instead of helping people around the world (or in their own backyard!) who are suffering far worse fates doesn't even stir their indolent sense of moral indignation.

Dogs have feelings too, you know. Sure, the priorities might not be right, but it's still a positive thing she's doing.

So do plants, in a sense. But resources are limited, so redirecting them (the ones involved here are both the money donated to and time spent on such causes) in a less than optimal way does hurt people. I'm sure bicyclists get uncomfortable while riding, and I'm sure that me spending my money buying them free seats may be seen as a 'nice' thing to do, until the bigger picture, and opportunity costs, come into focus.

For an example of the sort of thing which is a more deserving recipient of our attention: in one ethnic cleansing between Armenia and Azerbaijan, an entire village was wiped out. One reporter escaped with footage, before the military rolled in, of a young girl and old woman, both strangled with barbed wire. The girl, just barely alive, was struggling to cling to what I can only assume was the corpse of her grandmother. I can guarantee that Americans have shed more dears for a cat with a droopy eye than they have for that girl, or the thousands like her who die brutally. They can't even take the time to inform themselves of the fact that their government often supported and supports such displays, in Central America, the Middle East, and East Timor, for example. One groups of rebels funded and armed by our government made a habit of butchering entire villages, and leaving the corpses of family members with their throats slit, and their tongues pulled out through the wound for the survivors to find. The fact that people in my country remain ignorant of this, that they refuse to look into what they sanction with their tax money, and then think that they deserve to feel morally upright sickens me. They spent the time that they could have spent educating themselves and performing what should be every citizen's civic duty (to inform oneself) volunteering at an animal shelter, and then continue to live their cushioned lives with a blithe sense of self-righteousness. Seeing ads like this just touches that nerve quite directly.

The causes are not mutually exclusive. If I buy a coke, I'm not stealing from starving children. Why would say that only she is out of reality? She is trying to make the world a better place, which is far better from the way most people spend most of their time.

(Also, animals are totes-magotes not the same as plants.)
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 11:17:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 11:07:04 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:44:57 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:42:57 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

It's the fact that people in the West are so horrifically out of touch with the rest of the world that spending money making sure that dogs are happy instead of helping people around the world (or in their own backyard!) who are suffering far worse fates doesn't even stir their indolent sense of moral indignation.

Dogs have feelings too, you know. Sure, the priorities might not be right, but it's still a positive thing she's doing.

So do plants, in a sense.

Wait, plants suffer, do they?

But resources are limited, so redirecting them (the ones involved here are both the money donated to and time spent on such causes) in a less than optimal way does hurt people.

People aren't obliged to help anyone else, at all. She is doing this of her own volition. The U.S is not a communistic nation; it's fantastic that people are actually caring about other things that can suffer. Yes, it's not the best, but it's still something.

I'm sure bicyclists get uncomfortable while riding, and I'm sure that me spending my money buying them free seats may be seen as a 'nice' thing to do, until the bigger picture, and opportunity costs, come into focus.

I'm sorry, but dogs suffering is far more important than what people impose on themselves. Dogs suffering like this, is still perhaps slightly less important than other human suffering, too -- the gap isn't as big, compared to the one between the bike-rider and dog suffering.


For an example of the sort of thing which is a more deserving recipient of our attention: in one ethnic cleansing between Armenia and Azerbaijan, an entire village was wiped out. One reporter escaped with footage, before the military rolled in, of a young girl and old woman, both strangled with barbed wire. The girl, just barely alive, was struggling to cling to what I can only assume was the corpse of her grandmother. I can guarantee that Americans have shed more dears for a cat with a droopy eye than they have for that girl, or the thousands like her who die brutally. They can't even take the time to inform themselves of the fact that their government often supported and supports such displays, in Central America, the Middle East, and East Timor, for example. One groups of rebels funded and armed by our government made a habit of butchering entire villages, and leaving the corpses of family members with their throats slit, and their tongues pulled out through the wound for the survivors to find.

Foreign issues are often a lot more complex, even when help is trying to be given, due to foreign governments having different ruling styles.

The fact that people in my country remain ignorant of this, that they refuse to look into what they sanction with their tax money, and then think that they deserve to feel morally upright sickens me. They spent the time that they could have spent educating themselves and performing what should be every citizen's civic duty (to inform oneself) volunteering at an animal shelter, and then continue to live their cushioned lives with a blithe sense of self-righteousness. Seeing ads like this just touches that nerve quite directly.

Again, it's good that people are doing something positive. Stop expecting sooo much from people's charity.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 11:21:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 11:12:04 PM, kbub wrote:
At 3/20/2014 11:07:04 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:44:57 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:42:57 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

It's the fact that people in the West are so horrifically out of touch with the rest of the world that spending money making sure that dogs are happy instead of helping people around the world (or in their own backyard!) who are suffering far worse fates doesn't even stir their indolent sense of moral indignation.

Dogs have feelings too, you know. Sure, the priorities might not be right, but it's still a positive thing she's doing.

So do plants, in a sense. But resources are limited, so redirecting them (the ones involved here are both the money donated to and time spent on such causes) in a less than optimal way does hurt people. I'm sure bicyclists get uncomfortable while riding, and I'm sure that me spending my money buying them free seats may be seen as a 'nice' thing to do, until the bigger picture, and opportunity costs, come into focus.

For an example of the sort of thing which is a more deserving recipient of our attention: in one ethnic cleansing between Armenia and Azerbaijan, an entire village was wiped out. One reporter escaped with footage, before the military rolled in, of a young girl and old woman, both strangled with barbed wire. The girl, just barely alive, was struggling to cling to what I can only assume was the corpse of her grandmother. I can guarantee that Americans have shed more dears for a cat with a droopy eye than they have for that girl, or the thousands like her who die brutally. They can't even take the time to inform themselves of the fact that their government often supported and supports such displays, in Central America, the Middle East, and East Timor, for example. One groups of rebels funded and armed by our government made a habit of butchering entire villages, and leaving the corpses of family members with their throats slit, and their tongues pulled out through the wound for the survivors to find. The fact that people in my country remain ignorant of this, that they refuse to look into what they sanction with their tax money, and then think that they deserve to feel morally upright sickens me. They spent the time that they could have spent educating themselves and performing what should be every citizen's civic duty (to inform oneself) volunteering at an animal shelter, and then continue to live their cushioned lives with a blithe sense of self-righteousness. Seeing ads like this just touches that nerve quite directly.

The causes are not mutually exclusive. If I buy a coke, I'm not stealing from starving children. Why would say that only she is out of reality? She is trying to make the world a better place, which is far better from the way most people spend most of their time.

But you educate yourself on the issues at hand, I assume. You strive to fight injustice. You have some sense of moral indignation and social awareness. A huge number of people don't, they honestly refer to this ad as the 'saddest thing in the world'. A few time's I've tried to explain why it isn't, not by a long shot, but I tend to get 'I'm not interested in that'. Ignorance is comfortable for them, and engaging in relatively meaningless little projects in order to feel 'moral' reinforces it. It's nothing against Sarah McLachlan personally, but more against that sort of willfully ignorant person.

(Also, animals are totes-magotes not the same as plants.)

Of course they aren't. But, as someone who's dedicated one's life to studying them, I'd beg to differ about moral equivalence.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
ADreamOfLiberty
Posts: 1,570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 11:23:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 11:17:54 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 11:07:04 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:44:57 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:42:57 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

It's the fact that people in the West are so horrifically out of touch with the rest of the world that spending money making sure that dogs are happy instead of helping people around the world (or in their own backyard!) who are suffering far worse fates doesn't even stir their indolent sense of moral indignation.

Dogs have feelings too, you know. Sure, the priorities might not be right, but it's still a positive thing she's doing.

So do plants, in a sense.

Wait, plants suffer, do they?

No they don't. They can be harmed but that is an identification of values which the plant cannot be aware of. A plant is a beautiful life form which deserves respect but it does not have consciousness as higher animals do. To say it can suffer is to say a computer can suffer.
LOL, yeah, it's pretty amazing how they think they can "reason" with you. - Sidewalker, speaking of advocates for sexual deviancy.

So, my advice, Liberty, is to go somewhere else. Leave, and never come back. - YYW

And that's what I did. Contact me at http://www.edeb8.com... by the same user name if you have anything you'd like to say.
kbub
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 11:25:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 11:21:56 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 11:12:04 PM, kbub wrote:
At 3/20/2014 11:07:04 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:44:57 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:42:57 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

It's the fact that people in the West are so horrifically out of touch with the rest of the world that spending money making sure that dogs are happy instead of helping people around the world (or in their own backyard!) who are suffering far worse fates doesn't even stir their indolent sense of moral indignation.

Dogs have feelings too, you know. Sure, the priorities might not be right, but it's still a positive thing she's doing.

So do plants, in a sense. But resources are limited, so redirecting them (the ones involved here are both the money donated to and time spent on such causes) in a less than optimal way does hurt people. I'm sure bicyclists get uncomfortable while riding, and I'm sure that me spending my money buying them free seats may be seen as a 'nice' thing to do, until the bigger picture, and opportunity costs, come into focus.

For an example of the sort of thing which is a more deserving recipient of our attention: in one ethnic cleansing between Armenia and Azerbaijan, an entire village was wiped out. One reporter escaped with footage, before the military rolled in, of a young girl and old woman, both strangled with barbed wire. The girl, just barely alive, was struggling to cling to what I can only assume was the corpse of her grandmother. I can guarantee that Americans have shed more dears for a cat with a droopy eye than they have for that girl, or the thousands like her who die brutally. They can't even take the time to inform themselves of the fact that their government often supported and supports such displays, in Central America, the Middle East, and East Timor, for example. One groups of rebels funded and armed by our government made a habit of butchering entire villages, and leaving the corpses of family members with their throats slit, and their tongues pulled out through the wound for the survivors to find. The fact that people in my country remain ignorant of this, that they refuse to look into what they sanction with their tax money, and then think that they deserve to feel morally upright sickens me. They spent the time that they could have spent educating themselves and performing what should be every citizen's civic duty (to inform oneself) volunteering at an animal shelter, and then continue to live their cushioned lives with a blithe sense of self-righteousness. Seeing ads like this just touches that nerve quite directly.

The causes are not mutually exclusive. If I buy a coke, I'm not stealing from starving children. Why would say that only she is out of reality? She is trying to make the world a better place, which is far better from the way most people spend most of their time.

But you educate yourself on the issues at hand, I assume. You strive to fight injustice. You have some sense of moral indignation and social awareness. A huge number of people don't, they honestly refer to this ad as the 'saddest thing in the world'. A few time's I've tried to explain why it isn't, not by a long shot, but I tend to get 'I'm not interested in that'. Ignorance is comfortable for them, and engaging in relatively meaningless little projects in order to feel 'moral' reinforces it. It's nothing against Sarah McLachlan personally, but more against that sort of willfully ignorant person.

I suppose you're right. I just think nonhuman animal protection is important too.

(Also, animals are totes-magotes not the same as plants.)

Of course they aren't. But, as someone who's dedicated one's life to studying them, I'd beg to differ about moral equivalence.

Studying which? And moral equivalence about which?
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 11:32:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 11:17:54 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 11:07:04 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:44:57 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:42:57 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

It's the fact that people in the West are so horrifically out of touch with the rest of the world that spending money making sure that dogs are happy instead of helping people around the world (or in their own backyard!) who are suffering far worse fates doesn't even stir their indolent sense of moral indignation.

Dogs have feelings too, you know. Sure, the priorities might not be right, but it's still a positive thing she's doing.

So do plants, in a sense.

Wait, plants suffer, do they?

There's definitely an awareness of deleterious stimuli, as much as non-human animals have. 'Suffering' isn't really good biological terminology.

But resources are limited, so redirecting them (the ones involved here are both the money donated to and time spent on such causes) in a less than optimal way does hurt people.

People aren't obliged to help anyone else, at all. She is doing this of her own volition. The U.S is not a communistic nation; it's fantastic that people are actually caring about other things that can suffer. Yes, it's not the best, but it's still something.

It's not about her, it's about the ignorant people who will shed tears over a droopy-eyed cat, while shrugging over the prospect of their money funding groups that brutally murder innocent people.

I'm sure bicyclists get uncomfortable while riding, and I'm sure that me spending my money buying them free seats may be seen as a 'nice' thing to do, until the bigger picture, and opportunity costs, come into focus.

I'm sorry, but dogs suffering is far more important than what people impose on themselves. Dogs suffering like this, is still perhaps slightly less important than other human suffering, too -- the gap isn't as big, compared to the one between the bike-rider and dog suffering.

Um, I was being hyperbolic intentionally, to demonstrate a point. That just because something appears 'nice' doesn't mean that it's the right thing to do in the situation. In a way, you even recognized my point.


For an example of the sort of thing which is a more deserving recipient of our attention: in one ethnic cleansing between Armenia and Azerbaijan, an entire village was wiped out. One reporter escaped with footage, before the military rolled in, of a young girl and old woman, both strangled with barbed wire. The girl, just barely alive, was struggling to cling to what I can only assume was the corpse of her grandmother. I can guarantee that Americans have shed more dears for a cat with a droopy eye than they have for that girl, or the thousands like her who die brutally. They can't even take the time to inform themselves of the fact that their government often supported and supports such displays, in Central America, the Middle East, and East Timor, for example. One groups of rebels funded and armed by our government made a habit of butchering entire villages, and leaving the corpses of family members with their throats slit, and their tongues pulled out through the wound for the survivors to find.

Foreign issues are often a lot more complex, even when help is trying to be given, due to foreign governments having different ruling styles.

The US government funded the Contras, who committed the throat-slitting killings. Citizen tax dollars paid for this to happen, to destabilize a regime we didn't like politically.

The fact that people in my country remain ignorant of this, that they refuse to look into what they sanction with their tax money, and then think that they deserve to feel morally upright sickens me. They spent the time that they could have spent educating themselves and performing what should be every citizen's civic duty (to inform oneself) volunteering at an animal shelter, and then continue to live their cushioned lives with a blithe sense of self-righteousness. Seeing ads like this just touches that nerve quite directly.

Again, it's good that people are doing something positive. Stop expecting sooo much from people's charity.

I'm sorry that I expect my fellow human beings to have a bit of perspective on life where things like the brutal murder of innocents are concerned /sarcasm.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 11:37:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 11:32:13 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 11:17:54 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 11:07:04 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:44:57 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:42:57 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

It's the fact that people in the West are so horrifically out of touch with the rest of the world that spending money making sure that dogs are happy instead of helping people around the world (or in their own backyard!) who are suffering far worse fates doesn't even stir their indolent sense of moral indignation.

Dogs have feelings too, you know. Sure, the priorities might not be right, but it's still a positive thing she's doing.

So do plants, in a sense.

Wait, plants suffer, do they?

There's definitely an awareness of deleterious stimuli, as much as non-human animals have. 'Suffering' isn't really good biological terminology.

If it's not suffering, then why does it matter?


But resources are limited, so redirecting them (the ones involved here are both the money donated to and time spent on such causes) in a less than optimal way does hurt people.

People aren't obliged to help anyone else, at all. She is doing this of her own volition. The U.S is not a communistic nation; it's fantastic that people are actually caring about other things that can suffer. Yes, it's not the best, but it's still something.

It's not about her, it's about the ignorant people who will shed tears over a droopy-eyed cat, while shrugging over the prospect of their money funding groups that brutally murder innocent people.

If it's not about her, then why are you responding to my post that was about her?


I'm sure bicyclists get uncomfortable while riding, and I'm sure that me spending my money buying them free seats may be seen as a 'nice' thing to do, until the bigger picture, and opportunity costs, come into focus.

I'm sorry, but dogs suffering is far more important than what people impose on themselves. Dogs suffering like this, is still perhaps slightly less important than other human suffering, too -- the gap isn't as big, compared to the one between the bike-rider and dog suffering.

Um, I was being hyperbolic intentionally, to demonstrate a point. That just because something appears 'nice' doesn't mean that it's the right thing to do in the situation. In a way, you even recognized my point.

So, you're saying that the dogs suffering is serious, and that your bike comparison wasn't. Why are you wasting my time? The dogs suffering is SERIOUS.



For an example of the sort of thing which is a more deserving recipient of our attention: in one ethnic cleansing between Armenia and Azerbaijan, an entire village was wiped out. One reporter escaped with footage, before the military rolled in, of a young girl and old woman, both strangled with barbed wire. The girl, just barely alive, was struggling to cling to what I can only assume was the corpse of her grandmother. I can guarantee that Americans have shed more dears for a cat with a droopy eye than they have for that girl, or the thousands like her who die brutally. They can't even take the time to inform themselves of the fact that their government often supported and supports such displays, in Central America, the Middle East, and East Timor, for example. One groups of rebels funded and armed by our government made a habit of butchering entire villages, and leaving the corpses of family members with their throats slit, and their tongues pulled out through the wound for the survivors to find.

Foreign issues are often a lot more complex, even when help is trying to be given, due to foreign governments having different ruling styles.

The US government funded the Contras, who committed the throat-slitting killings. Citizen tax dollars paid for this to happen, to destabilize a regime we didn't like politically.

What has this got to do with good charity work?


The fact that people in my country remain ignorant of this, that they refuse to look into what they sanction with their tax money, and then think that they deserve to feel morally upright sickens me. They spent the time that they could have spent educating themselves and performing what should be every citizen's civic duty (to inform oneself) volunteering at an animal shelter, and then continue to live their cushioned lives with a blithe sense of self-righteousness. Seeing ads like this just touches that nerve quite directly.

Again, it's good that people are doing something positive. Stop expecting sooo much from people's charity.

I'm sorry that I expect my fellow human beings to have a bit of perspective on life where things like the brutal murder of innocents are concerned /sarcasm.

Yeah, well we're not capable of solving every problem, buddy. You're complaining about people do something good. Yes, some other things might need attention, but that doesn't mean that this charity work isn't good.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 11:37:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 11:23:27 PM, ADreamOfLiberty wrote:
At 3/20/2014 11:17:54 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 11:07:04 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:44:57 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:42:57 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

It's the fact that people in the West are so horrifically out of touch with the rest of the world that spending money making sure that dogs are happy instead of helping people around the world (or in their own backyard!) who are suffering far worse fates doesn't even stir their indolent sense of moral indignation.

Dogs have feelings too, you know. Sure, the priorities might not be right, but it's still a positive thing she's doing.

So do plants, in a sense.

Wait, plants suffer, do they?

No they don't. They can be harmed but that is an identification of values which the plant cannot be aware of. A plant is a beautiful life form which deserves respect but it does not have consciousness as higher animals do. To say it can suffer is to say a computer can suffer.

People 'suffer' in much the same way that computers do too, when you get right down to it. All life does. And plants are aware of it, strictly speaking; they wouldn't be able to respond to it if they weren't. If you're talking about self-awareness, very few animals have been shown to possess that.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 11:40:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 11:25:43 PM, kbub wrote:
At 3/20/2014 11:21:56 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 11:12:04 PM, kbub wrote:
At 3/20/2014 11:07:04 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:44:57 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:42:57 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

It's the fact that people in the West are so horrifically out of touch with the rest of the world that spending money making sure that dogs are happy instead of helping people around the world (or in their own backyard!) who are suffering far worse fates doesn't even stir their indolent sense of moral indignation.

Dogs have feelings too, you know. Sure, the priorities might not be right, but it's still a positive thing she's doing.

So do plants, in a sense. But resources are limited, so redirecting them (the ones involved here are both the money donated to and time spent on such causes) in a less than optimal way does hurt people. I'm sure bicyclists get uncomfortable while riding, and I'm sure that me spending my money buying them free seats may be seen as a 'nice' thing to do, until the bigger picture, and opportunity costs, come into focus.

For an example of the sort of thing which is a more deserving recipient of our attention: in one ethnic cleansing between Armenia and Azerbaijan, an entire village was wiped out. One reporter escaped with footage, before the military rolled in, of a young girl and old woman, both strangled with barbed wire. The girl, just barely alive, was struggling to cling to what I can only assume was the corpse of her grandmother. I can guarantee that Americans have shed more dears for a cat with a droopy eye than they have for that girl, or the thousands like her who die brutally. They can't even take the time to inform themselves of the fact that their government often supported and supports such displays, in Central America, the Middle East, and East Timor, for example. One groups of rebels funded and armed by our government made a habit of butchering entire villages, and leaving the corpses of family members with their throats slit, and their tongues pulled out through the wound for the survivors to find. The fact that people in my country remain ignorant of this, that they refuse to look into what they sanction with their tax money, and then think that they deserve to feel morally upright sickens me. They spent the time that they could have spent educating themselves and performing what should be every citizen's civic duty (to inform oneself) volunteering at an animal shelter, and then continue to live their cushioned lives with a blithe sense of self-righteousness. Seeing ads like this just touches that nerve quite directly.

The causes are not mutually exclusive. If I buy a coke, I'm not stealing from starving children. Why would say that only she is out of reality? She is trying to make the world a better place, which is far better from the way most people spend most of their time.

But you educate yourself on the issues at hand, I assume. You strive to fight injustice. You have some sense of moral indignation and social awareness. A huge number of people don't, they honestly refer to this ad as the 'saddest thing in the world'. A few time's I've tried to explain why it isn't, not by a long shot, but I tend to get 'I'm not interested in that'. Ignorance is comfortable for them, and engaging in relatively meaningless little projects in order to feel 'moral' reinforces it. It's nothing against Sarah McLachlan personally, but more against that sort of willfully ignorant person.

I suppose you're right. I just think nonhuman animal protection is important too.

(Also, animals are totes-magotes not the same as plants.)

Of course they aren't. But, as someone who's dedicated one's life to studying them, I'd beg to differ about moral equivalence.

Studying which? And moral equivalence about which?

Plants. They can react and communicate chemically. People just empathize with animals more because the signs of the processes at play are more familiar because, well, we are animals. But the principles are the same, awareness is awareness.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 11:42:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 11:37:20 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 11:32:13 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 11:17:54 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 11:07:04 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:44:57 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:42:57 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/20/2014 10:32:48 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:55:58 PM, tulle wrote:
At 3/20/2014 3:11:27 AM, YYW wrote:
people who would rather donate their time and money to save animals than to feed people, Sarah McLachlan

I literally lol'd



What's wrong with this lady? She's helping animals!

It's the fact that people in the West are so horrifically out of touch with the rest of the world that spending money making sure that dogs are happy instead of helping people around the world (or in their own backyard!) who are suffering far worse fates doesn't even stir their indolent sense of moral indignation.

Dogs have feelings too, you know. Sure, the priorities might not be right, but it's still a positive thing she's doing.

So do plants, in a sense.

Wait, plants suffer, do they?

There's definitely an awareness of deleterious stimuli, as much as non-human animals have. 'Suffering' isn't really good biological terminology.

If it's not suffering, then why does it matter?


But resources are limited, so redirecting them (the ones involved here are both the money donated to and time spent on such causes) in a less than optimal way does hurt people.

People aren't obliged to help anyone else, at all. She is doing this of her own volition. The U.S is not a communistic nation; it's fantastic that people are actually caring about other things that can suffer. Yes, it's not the best, but it's still something.

It's not about her, it's about the ignorant people who will shed tears over a droopy-eyed cat, while shrugging over the prospect of their money funding groups that brutally murder innocent people.

If it's not about her, then why are you responding to my post that was about her?


I'm sure bicyclists get uncomfortable while riding, and I'm sure that me spending my money buying them free seats may be seen as a 'nice' thing to do, until the bigger picture, and opportunity costs, come into focus.

I'm sorry, but dogs suffering is far more important than what people impose on themselves. Dogs suffering like this, is still perhaps slightly less important than other human suffering, too -- the gap isn't as big, compared to the one between the bike-rider and dog suffering.

Um, I was being hyperbolic intentionally, to demonstrate a point. That just because something appears 'nice' doesn't mean that it's the right thing to do in the situation. In a way, you even recognized my point.

So, you're saying that the dogs suffering is serious, and that your bike comparison wasn't. Why are you wasting my time? The dogs suffering is SERIOUS.



For an example of the sort of thing which is a more deserving recipient of our attention: in one ethnic cleansing between Armenia and Azerbaijan, an entire village was wiped out. One reporter escaped with footage, before the military rolled in, of a young girl and old woman, both strangled with barbed wire. The girl, just barely alive, was struggling to cling to what I can only assume was the corpse of her grandmother. I can guarantee that Americans have shed more dears for a cat with a droopy eye than they have for that girl, or the thousands like her who die brutally. They can't even take the time to inform themselves of the fact that their government often supported and supports such displays, in Central America, the Middle East, and East Timor, for example. One groups of rebels funded and armed by our government made a habit of butchering entire villages, and leaving the corpses of family members with their throats slit, and their tongues pulled out through the wound for the survivors to find.

Foreign issues are often a lot more complex, even when help is trying to be given, due to foreign governments having different ruling styles.

The US government funded the Contras, who committed the throat-slitting killings. Citizen tax dollars paid for this to happen, to destabilize a regime we didn't like politically.

What has this got to do with good charity work?


The fact that people in my country remain ignorant of this, that they refuse to look into what they sanction with their tax money, and then think that they deserve to feel morally upright sickens me. They spent the time that they could have spent educating themselves and performing what should be every citizen's civic duty (to inform oneself) volunteering at an animal shelter, and then continue to live their cushioned lives with a blithe sense of self-righteousness. Seeing ads like this just touches that nerve quite directly.

Again, it's good that people are doing something positive. Stop expecting sooo much from people's charity.

I'm sorry that I expect my fellow human beings to have a bit of perspective on life where things like the brutal murder of innocents are concerned /sarcasm.

Yeah, well we're not capable of solving every problem, buddy. You're complaining about people do something good. Yes, some other things might need attention, but that doesn't mean that this charity work isn't good.

I'm astounded by your uncanny ability to completely misconstrue and oversimplify each and every one of my points in unique, interesting ways.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 11:48:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 11:42:52 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:

I'm astounded by your uncanny ability to completely misconstrue and oversimplify each and every one of my points in unique, interesting ways.

1) You haven't proven that plants suffer, you've only suggested that they're aware, to some degree. Please cite your argument.

2) The prevention of animal suffering is GOOD. The intention itself is GOOD.

3) This is charity work we're talking about, not governmental aid. It's of no relevance to what I was talking about, to say that the directed of expenditure is slightly misguided, because it's people's own money, anyway. Are you going to complain that when people buy icecreams, that they're not helping to save Africa?

Stop pretending that the world needs to work idealistically, or else it's completely failing.