| If you knew that you could kill someone that has wronged you personally without the fear of any repercussion would you do it? |
|
|
|
Asked 3 years ago
by jmcd617  United States |
|
About
Well since you're asking I'd have to say I'm somewhere between a Ferris Bueller and a Biff Tannen minus the charisma of the former and the squad of lackeys of the latter plus a good deal more incontinence and existential angst than either. Come to think of it, perhaps there's another 80's semi-celeb that would more concisely and accurately serve to sum up how I want you to see me. Ok, let's start from scratch here. Think a young Corey Feldman. Not super young mind you... think like Stand by Me Era but with slightly better hair... maybe. Ok let's say Corey Feldman if he were a little more like River Phoenix in that movie but still ultimately found his inner man unexpectedly like Will Wheaton did when it came down to the nitty grit. Definitely nothing like Jerry O'connell though that fat little shit. I used to know a kid like that when I was younger that definitely wasn't me and I used to choke him and scream, "why are you so fat?",.. beat the shit out of him. Yeah that's me alright. Man I am one cool guy let me tell you.
|
| 5 Points |
No. Even though I'm not religious I was thoroughly brainwashed as a kid, so I would never kill myself or anyone else because ya never know what the Invisible Cop is jotting down in her notebook to hold against you on Judgment Day.
But wait a second. You said "any repercussion" so that would have to include both this lifetime and the next, so if there was absolutely no repercussion, then maybe I would because with nothing to fear there would not be any guilt either.
That's the old, "we have to have religion to keep people moral" trap. One can have moral principles without fear of reprisals in the afterlife.
If not for religion what is immoral about an eye for an eye? It is religion that introduced us to "Thou shalt not kill" (except with governmental approval) and "turn the other cheek." Right?
Well gee... I dunno. So you are suggesting in all the non-Christian countries of the world, people just go around killing each other willy nilly. Somehow, I don't think so.
Where do you think 'an eye for an eye' came from (religion, perhaps)? Don't conflate religion with Christianity. Even then, there's some stuff in the Old Testament (where Christianity came from) that will curl your toes.
btw... after Jesus said, "turn the other cheek" he said, "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." Matt 10:34
"...not to send peace, but a sword."
<gulp> ...somewhere along the line I missed that one. :-)
Then there's Numbers 31 where Moses says, "Have you saved all the women alive? Kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."
So they went back and did as Moses (and presumably God) instructed, killing everyone except for the virgins. In this way they got 32,000 virgins -- Wow!
They sure knew how to make the numbers inspire a person's imagination.
Makes that paltry 72 virgins that Muslims are promised pale by comparison, doesn't it?
Indeed. :)
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 3 years ago by deleted user ReplyThe fear of getting caught is what holds people in check. Forget the religious argument or killing being right or wrong and look at it like this. IF there is not a cop around and the road is wide open do you step on the gas or hold to the speed limit. The same thing would apply to killing someone. Eventually if they did enough to you or one really big thing and there was know way that you would ever get caught a lot more people would kill than not.
I would (and do) hold to the speed limit. So much for that analogy. Besides, speeding is not a crime which deprives another human being of their rights. "..any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee."
If a wild animal is pursuing you and threatening you in a menacing way, would you not kill the wild animal?
Well, without religion, what is another man but a wild animal if he is pursuing you and threatening you in a menacing way?
Suppose one of these "animals" has already attacked you or someone you know, would you not feel like doing the same thing to them that the dog pound would do if a pit bull hurt or killed someone? Without religious teachings to inhibit us why would we not feel motivated to do similarly to a human as we would do to a pit bull? If not for religion what is there that makes us human?
So you are saying that anyone who is not religious is inhuman? Seriously?
As a matter of fact, my first inclination would be to avoid or flee from the wild animal menacing me, not to kill it.
Oh and please don't malign pit bulls. My daughter has pit bull and it is the sweetest dog in the world.
My comments, of course, do not apply to every situation (or every pit bull). In fact, in many cases, religion inspired guilt leads to new crimes. There seems to be a Catch-22 in there regardless of what direction you approach the subject from.
and here I was to think that Wrath was a common vice.
yes I would