Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Battle Royale VII Specific discussion thread

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by heusdens
    Zorkewl:

    So sorry to forget about interpunction. I will keep my sentences shorter.
    Much obliged.

    Comment


    • #62
      Hey, now it will let me post! Sometimes it doesn't.

      Just call me the cheerleader...

      WOWWWW! Zakath's 5th post was by far by far his best post yet, imvho. I see a couple comebacks available, but I don't see a LOT of others. I can NOT WAIT to see Bob Enyart's response! These 48 hour waits can be real killers!

      Comment


      • #63
        Doesn't Zakath claim he is a former pastor?

        Why would Zakath lob Bob such a softball in his "Argument from Nonbelief"???

        And furthermore... if Zakath really were a pastor (and I certainly do not doubt he was) wouldn't he know the answer Bob is going to give???

        It was a good post by Zakath in that I think he put more effort into this one... but I think Bob is going to nail that softball out of the park!
        Oh, wise guy eh?

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by novice
          Doesn't Zakath claim he is a former pastor?

          Why would Zakath lob Bob such a softball in his "Argument from Nonbelief"???
          I was wondering about that myself. It almost sounds like a joke. I can't help but wonder if he kept a straight face while he was typing it.

          Comment


          • #65
            OYJ: I was wondering about that myself. It almost sounds like a joke. I can't help but wonder if he kept a straight face while he was typing it.
            Well, considdering Zakath was a pastor, he has probably given this arguement some thought. Since he knows the "standard" answer that Bob might give him (I think Zakath is counting on it) he probably has a pretty nasty response waiting for Bob should he give Zakath the answer Zakath is expecting.

            Now, the arguement from Non-Belief doesn't seem that plausible to me at the moment, but Zakath didn't post it simply to have Bob refute it. Zakath has a clear answer in his head which he'll give once Bob posted his reply.

            The last few posts have all gone Zakath's way, and I can hardly wait what Bob's counterpoint is going to be. Bob's refusal to state his "Absolute Moral Values/Laws/Rules" is a weakness on his part. He knows that, whatever he presents as absolute, Zakath will not have a hard time trying to counter them with circumstances in which Bob's supposedly "Absolute values" will fail. This will disprove Bob's arguement rather nicely, and Bob knows this will happen, hence his refusal to state them.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by shima
              Bob's refusal to state his "Absolute Moral Values/Laws/Rules" is a weakness on his part. He knows that, whatever he presents as absolute, Zakath will not have a hard time trying to counter them with circumstances in which Bob's supposedly "Absolute values" will fail. This will disprove Bob's arguement rather nicely, and Bob knows this will happen, hence his refusal to state them.
              I think Bob did do this. He basically said that rape is always wrong. He said that it is better for the entire human race to become extinct than for a person to be raped. This seems pretty clear to me.

              --ZK

              Comment


              • #67
                He said that it is better for the entire human race to become extinct than for a person to be raped.
                Good. Now, can he prove that it is always wrong? If he cannot, then it is just Bob's opinion against mine, because I think its not wrong to rape a woman to save the human race.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by shima
                  Good. Now, can he prove that it is always wrong? If he cannot, then it is just Bob's opinion against mine, because I think its not wrong to rape a woman to save the human race.
                  You've never been very popular with the ladies, have you? You might as well get used to it, because no woman in her right mind would want anything to do with you after hearing that. Rape is always wrong.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by One Eyed Jack
                    Rape is always wrong.

                    Unless of course it happens in a country (Saudi Arabia) that is allied with the United Stated, and was willing to support the war against Iraq.

                    Then it is another question...

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Rape is wrong regardless of what country it happens in, or who does it.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by One Eyed Jack
                        Rape is wrong regardless of what country it happens in, or who does it.
                        I meant it ironically

                        Since United States advocates human rights, and base even military and economic actions on that, against other nations, they sometimes look in another direction, as their prime interests are at state.

                        That is what I meant to say.

                        You don't think that I could mean that any rape committed by anyone under any circumstance in any country is justifyable.

                        Even raping animals....!

                        And the "hypothetical rape to save the human race" argument, is not something of consideration, since a lot of actual rapes occur, which ARE worth considering, so why would we bother hypothetical crimes that are not even committed then?

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by heusdens
                          And the "hypothetical rape to save the human race" argument, is not something of consideration, since a lot of actual rapes occur, which ARE worth considering, so why would we bother hypothetical crimes that are not even committed then?
                          Maybe you should ask shima and Zakath that, since they're the ones using that argument.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by One Eyed Jack
                            Maybe you should ask shima and Zakath that, since they're the ones using that argument.
                            You are right. The argument is in fact ridiculous, as used by Zakath and shima.

                            (well at least we do agree on "something"!)

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              A thorough pummeling

                              I'm glad Zakath is milking the "God of the Gaps" argument. Hopefully Bob will address it thoroughly in the next post.

                              Once that argument is amply refuted, Zakath has next to nothing in this debate.

                              HANG IN THERE ZAKATH. <--- Better put some ice on that shiner.

                              Hope you last all ten rounds. You better double up on that blackberry juice. <--- Zakath's swollen eye from four rounds of pummeling.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by heusdens
                                And the "hypothetical rape to save the human race" argument, is not something of consideration, since a lot of actual rapes occur, which ARE worth considering, so why would we bother hypothetical crimes that are not even committed then?
                                Because if one is going to propose a set of moral absolutes, then they must be absolute in every conceiveble circumstance. The "save the world" scenario demonstrates a circumstance where the morality of rape becomes relative, because you must weigh it against the extinction of the species. Many, including me, would say it is acceptable to rape in this one, extreme circumstance. Therefore it's not a moral absolute, despite the fact that Bob has asserted that it is. It demonstrates Bob's short-sightedness. It may be absolute for him, but not for everyone.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X