Murder is not wrong.

Would it be okay if it's record setting? 78 anyone?

murder is natural..

to a certain extent yes.

murder is premeditated. meaning its planned. (not an act of rage or accident)

only beings of "higher" intelligence (comparatively) murder.

apes murder.

but as higher emotions develope, murder becomes less and less of a possibility.

and in the end, impossible.

if you do not understand that,then you do not simply have the brains for it. are´nt evolved enough.

hmm there is a thread on here titled has anyone ever killed someone. My opinion is that I want to kill someone before I die. Not that I want to kill an innocent person but I am going to have killed someone before I die none the less. Me being an atheist I know that I must do everything I can possibly do in this life on earth just in case the most likely event I die and nothing happens. If there is an after life I will do everything I can then as well. I also have never experienced guilt in my life although I have felt regret so I would like too see how I feel after killing someone as well. I would also like to add I am probably not a normal person and do not recommend going and killing someone but I still think we should try everything we do not know the outcome of before we die. Also killing is natural but for natural reasons such as defending yourself, family or property/land etc.

sso said:

murder is natural..

to a certain extent yes.

murder is premeditated. meaning its planned. (not an act of rage or accident)

only beings of "higher" intelligence (comparatively) murder.

apes murder.

but as higher emotions develope, murder becomes less and less of a possibility.

and in the end, impossible.

if you do not understand that,then you do not simply have the brains for it. are´nt evolved enough.

Click to expand...

Even the dumbest animals think before they kill and decide on what they believe is the best way to go about it. Instincts help naturally. Murder by definition, as it has been stated before in this thread,
"The act of one human killing another"
Oxford dictionary bitches.

The Cryptkeeper said:

Even the dumbest animals think before they kill and decide on what they believe is the best way to go about it. Instincts help naturally. Murder by definition, as it has been stated before in this thread,
"The act of one human killing another"
Oxford dictionary bitches.

Click to expand...

driven by hunger to eat another species, is nowhere near the same as murdering another of your own species for gain or revenge.

specially when the species is as "advanced" as humans.

and really comparing the two, puts you rather too low on the intelligence scale for me to bother more with an answer than this

sso said:

driven by hunger to eat another species, is nowhere near the same as murdering another of your own species for gain or revenge.

specially when the species is as "advanced" as humans.

and really comparing the two, puts you rather too low on the intelligence scale for me to bother more with an answer than this

Click to expand...

I'm sure you believe that to be true even though your place on the intelligence scale renders you incapable of grasping the true reasoning and meaning behind the debate.

See what I did there? I said something and presented it as fact. Surely it is, right? Because I said you're rather too low on the intelligence scale, that automatically makes it so, right?

To easy.

You're assuming that all killing in the 'unadvanced' animal kingdom is done by hunger and as we all know, assuming is foolish.

The Cryptkeeper said:

I'm sure you believe that to be true even though your place on the intelligence scale renders you incapable of grasping the true reasoning and meaning behind the debate.

See what I did there? I said something and presented it as fact. Surely it is, right? Because I said you're rather too low on the intelligence scale, that automatically makes it so, right?

To easy.

You're assuming that all killing in the 'unadvanced' animal kingdom is done by hunger and as we all know, assuming is foolish.

Click to expand...

yes, that was quite admirable thinking of your part, very cunning

ill indulge, name any killing in the animal kingdom done out of anything but hunger, (setting aside, "higher" lifeforms, such as monkeys, dolphins, humans and possibly some others)

sso said:

yes, that was quite admirable thinking of your part, very cunning

ill indulge, name any killing in the animal kingdom done out of anything but hunger, (setting aside, "higher" lifeforms, such as monkeys, dolphins, humans and possibly some others)

Click to expand...

First I want you to admit that you believe that there is no killing done out of anything but hunger.

The Cryptkeeper said:

First I want you to admit that you believe that there is no killing done out of anything but hunger.

Click to expand...

name me an example othervise.

sso said:

name me an example othervise.

Click to expand...

Othervise what? Either you plainly state your stance, or else you're not going to indulge.

yes, this is what i said about intelligence

i did plainly state my "stance" and i did indulge, but got nothing back but convoluted attempts at cunning (apart from that one, but it was hardly original)

and on your wants, we dont always get what we want

sso said:

yes, this is what i said about intelligence

i did plainly state my "stance" and i did indulge, but got nothing back but convoluted attempts at cunning (apart from that one, but it was hardly original)

and on your wants, we dont always get what we want

Click to expand...

We seem to be exemplifying what eachother said to the effect of mistaken intelligence. Because right here, you mistakenly believe that just because you believe what you said is plain, it is entirely left up for your audience to decide. Sorry.

The Cryptkeeper said:

We seem to be exemplifying what eachother said to the effect of mistaken intelligence. Because right here, you mistakenly believe that just because you believe what you said is plain, it is entirely left up for your audience to decide. Sorry.

Click to expand...

well the judgement of intelligence is left to our own devises, since society has yet to discover a proper means to measure it.

and i thought that was damn plain lol

i would however be quite willing to explain the parts you didnt understand, in painstaking detail of course.
slowly

in order for you to be able to grasp it

hehehe yeah, this fizzed bit off, cant seem to bring it back meself, care to have a go at it?

sso said:

well the judgement of intelligence is left to our own devises, since society has yet to discover a proper means to measure it.

and i thought that was damn plain lol

i would however be quite willing to explain the parts you didnt understand, in painstaking detail of course.
slowly

in order for you to be able to grasp it

hehehe yeah, this fizzed bit off, cant seem to bring it back meself, care to have a go at it?

Click to expand...

Haha Once again you leave yourself open to holes being poked in your posts. You assumed, yet again. I never said what you said wasn't plain to me. I just poked a hole in your post by saying that it is left up to the reader to decide whether or not it's plain. So, unlike murder, you're wrong.

The Cryptkeeper said:

Haha Once again you leave yourself open to holes being poked in your posts. You assumed, yet again. I never said what you said wasn't plain to me. I just poked a hole in your post by saying that it is left up to the reader to decide whether or not it's plain. So, unlike murder, you're wrong.

Click to expand...

what? i had surrendered to such an obviously greater opponent, whats wrong with that?

miscontrued me terribly and once again proving your level of intelligence

and, these are the methods of a politician in front of a crowd thats judging, hoping for votes

this would be a personal fence and any witnesses immaterial. so how would victory be decided but in our own minds?

and certainly your ego is far too bloated for me to dare pop it, simply for the sheer safety of anyone around you?

sso said:

what? i had surrendered to such an obviously greater opponent, whats wrong with that?

miscontrued me terribly and once again proving your level of intelligence

and, these are the methods of a politician in front of a crowd thats judging, hoping for votes

this would be a personal fence and any witnesses immaterial. so how would victory be decided but in our own minds?

and certainly your ego is far too bloated for me to dare pop it, simply for the sheer safety of anyone around you?

Click to expand...

I'm not looking for a surrender. lol It's a debate. You surrender from arguments. But as everyone knows, arguing on the internet is only for dumbasses.


You gonna keep going with personal jabs and assume you're the enlightened one?

Your stance wasn't clear to me, and will only be if you give one of these two posts.

"I do believe that the only killing is done from hunger"
"I do not believe that the only killing is done from hunger"

The Cryptkeeper said:

I'm not looking for a surrender. lol It's a debate. You surrender from arguments. But as everyone knows, arguing on the internet is only for dumbasses.
i thought this was a fight? a battle? and there is nothing wrong with being an occasional dumbass, (lets get retarded in here! )

You gonna keep going with personal jabs and assume you're the enlightened one?
thats a big assumption on your parts, i rather find the general consensus on enlightenment, bit of a joke.how can i be enlightened? and its a really big assumption on your parts, that im "nice"
Your stance wasn't clear to me, and will only be if you give one of these two posts.
you fall on your own words, i thought you knew to keep your wits about you, or however that went
"I do believe that the only killing is done from hunger"
"I do not believe that the only killing is done from hunger"

Click to expand...

you´d have to define both posts much better. much much better. thats a very limited stance and would only be correct within very certain parameters. (and i allready explained those)

and besides, by your own words, you need no explaining, you are a master wordfighter, yes?

sso said:

you´d have to define both posts much better. much much better. thats a very limited stance and would only be correct within very certain parameters. (and i allready explained those)

and besides, by your own words, you need no explaining, you are a master wordfighter, yes?

Click to expand...

Are we in the same thread?

its possible you lost track, yes.