I think if you need to be taught not to kill people, then there is something wrong with you.

Exactly! For most people there is no need to be taught that doing things that could get people killed is unacceptable behavior. Once they accept that murder is bad, they understand that some behavior is therefor bad as well.

You don't need to be taught anything except empathy. Once you are capable of stopping and thinking "would I like it if someone was doing this to me?" you can rule out most anti-social behaviours.

Yes. Some brains simply can not process empathy and I suspect others over process it.

Studies have shown that the richer you are the more problem you have with empathy.

I think it lies within oneself, what ones opinion is on money that is, the empathy part lies more within the EQ of a person.

How Wealth Reduces Compassion
As riches grow, empathy for others seems to decline

I know what I'm talking about.

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

How did morals get inside of you? You are born knowing right from wrong. They need no trigger to come outside of you, they are natural. You have inferred it and they are a gift, LOL, as I see it.

Written on your heart so to speak...

Ethics of murder have taken a slide, we all know murder is wrong. We all know to defend ones self is right and a true thing to do, natural of us. But, a zygote means nothing to you, why? Because it does not look like a human to you? It's (zygote, human person) DNA tell us this human is unique to this world. Yet ethics, not morals tells you it's Okay to kill it off. Yet the same ethic does not apply to you all if I was walking on Mars with a magnifying glass and burned off the only multicellular organism left on the planet. Why is that?

You say I, at the center of law, a moral man, with what you call yesterdays ethics, am hard right person. I am not. I am at the center of law. You are hard outside of my (human) ethics. Natural life from start to natural end is center of law, not hard right or left.

If you're going to make a mistake, make the mistake of life...

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

For most people there is no need to be taught that doing things that could get people killed is unacceptable behavior. Once they accept that murder is bad, they understand that some behavior is therefor bad as well.

Depends what the definition of Murder is.

The definition changes, depending in what Culture/Religion, the person belongs to.

yes, but it is worse. once your religion commands murder in some situations then murder becomes acceptable in many more situations. the restriction or command is now just rationalization.

---

For most people there is no need to be taught that doing things that could get people killed is unacceptable behavior. Once they accept that murder is bad, they understand that some behavior is therefor bad as well.

Depends what the definition of Murder is.

The definition changes, depending in what Culture/Religion, the person belongs to.

I think you've hit the nail on the head.

Some people, it seems have more empathy for a ball of cells than a thinking, feeling woman who can actually feel pain and suffer.

I will never understand that.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Depends what the definition of Murder is.

The definition changes, depending in what Culture/Religion, the person belongs to.

So true, many men have been "executed" for refusing to fight in a war. Eisenhower had Pvt. Slovik shot, is that murder? If so that makes the firing squad murders.

17-year-old Private Herbert Burden was shot for the same reason. Now there is a monument to him. So yes what is murder, what are morals?

Some people, it seems have more empathy for a ball of cells than a thinking, feeling woman who can actually feel pain and suffer.

I will never understand that.

How much pain did they young MEN shot for refusing to serve in the militarily feel. Where is your compassion for them? Situational ethics.

---

Depends what the definition of Murder is.

The definition changes, depending in what Culture/Religion, the person belongs to.

So true, many men have been "executed" for refusing to fight in a war. Eisenhower had Pvt. Slovik shot, is that murder? If so that makes the firing squad murders.

17-year-old Private Herbert Burden was shot for the same reason. Now there is a monument to him. So yes what is murder, what are morals?

Some people, it seems have more empathy for a ball of cells than a thinking, feeling woman who can actually feel pain and suffer.

I will never understand that.

How much pain did they young MEN shot for refusing to serve in the militarily feel. Where is your compassion for them? Situational ethics.

Huh?

Who says I don't have compassion for them? Or did you mean to reply to someone else?

---

Reality Internet Personality

How Wealth Reduces Compassion
As riches grow, empathy for others seems to decline

I think its natural selection so to speak. The ones who are ruthless succeed while the ones that have empathy do not. So the richer you get and therefor the more success you had, the more ruthless you are likely to be, the less empathy you feel for others.

Capitalism is poison in that sense, it promotes anti social behavior while it punishes social behavior. The quicker we replace Capitalism with something else the better.

Ethics of murder have taken a slide, we all know murder is wrong. We all know to defend ones self is right and a true thing to do, natural of us. But, a zygote means nothing to you, why? Because it does not look like a human to you? It's (zygote, human person) DNA tell us this human is unique to this world. Yet ethics, not morals tells you it's Okay to kill it off. Yet the same ethic does not apply to you all if I was walking on Mars with a magnifying glass and burned off the only multicellular organism left on the planet. Why is that?

Morals also say its okay to get rid of this little bunch of cells. In this case because the moral principle is individuality which implies that women should have control over their own bodies which means abortion is a choice women should be allowed to make for themselves. This moral principle does not apply to zygotes because they have no agency, no person hood, nor personality and therefor no individuality.

Another thing that needs to be taken into account is that abortion noticeably prevents other immoral or unethical actions later on in time. Basically it prevents future crimes and prevents people in the future from becoming victims. It also gives people the chance to break the cycle of poverty and thus improve society as a whole.

A different moral principle counts for you killing the last living thing on Mars. For one, that creature is alive and reached the stage where its self sustaining. The moral principle there is that you should not destroy life needlessly. By killing it for no reason you are in violation of that moral principle and therefor you are unethical.

The quicker we replace Capitalism with something else the better.

Agreed 100%! Capitalists are a pest to society...

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

The quicker we replace Capitalism with something else the better.

Agreed 100%! Capitalists are a pest to society...

I'm more inclined to call capitalists parasites myself. ;-)

Cheers.

The quicker we replace Capitalism with something else the better.

Agreed 100%! Capitalists are a pest to society...

Where would trade and industry be without capitalists?

The quicker we replace Capitalism with something else the better.

Agreed 100%! Capitalists are a pest to society...

Where would trade and industry be without capitalists?

What have trade and industry really done for us except making it tougher to survive in a growing industrialized world? Do you think the cavemen had trade and industry? They probably had barter then, they survived...

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

The quicker we replace Capitalism with something else the better.

Agreed 100%! Capitalists are a pest to society...

Where would trade and industry be without capitalists?

What have trade and industry really done for us except making it tougher to survive in a growing industrialized world? Do you think the cavemen had trade and industry? They probably had barter then, they survived...

Lets say that suddenly you have a brain wave and think of something that there is a market for. You do the research and ask questions and the indications this is an good idea. But it will mean giving up your job and working on that idea for several months before it can get to market.

To finance this, and keep your family fed etc. you get a loan from the bank and further mortgage your house.

Then you hit a brick wall, you need premises and equipment, plus money to hire people. Where do you go to?

Dragon's Den

The quicker we replace Capitalism with something else the better.

Agreed 100%! Capitalists are a pest to society...

Where would trade and industry be without capitalists?

What have trade and industry really done for us except making it tougher to survive in a growing industrialized world? Do you think the cavemen had trade and industry? They probably had barter then, they survived...

Lets say that suddenly you have a brain wave and think of something that there is a market for. You do the research and ask questions and the indications this is an good idea. But it will mean giving up your job and working on that idea for several months before it can get to market.

To finance this, and keep your family fed etc. you get a loan from the bank and further mortgage your house.

Then you hit a brick wall, you need premises and equipment, plus money to hire people. Where do you go to?

Dragon's Den

Like I said, hard to survive in today's society... Why do we need money for is what I ask myself sometimes. If money had never existed, the world would have been totally different...

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

Ethics of murder have taken a slide, we all know murder is wrong. We all know to defend ones self is right and a true thing to do, natural of us. But, a zygote means nothing to you, why? Because it does not look like a human to you? It's (zygote, human person) DNA tell us this human is unique to this world. Yet ethics, not morals tells you it's Okay to kill it off. Yet the same ethic does not apply to you all if I was walking on Mars with a magnifying glass and burned off the only multicellular organism left on the planet. Why is that?

Morals also say its okay to get rid of this little bunch of cells. In this case because the moral principle is individuality which implies that women should have control over their own bodies which means abortion is a choice women should be allowed to make for themselves. This moral principle does not apply to zygotes because they have no agency, no person hood, nor personality and therefor no individuality.

Yet you say..."For one, that creature is alive and reached the stage where its self sustaining.", as is the zygote, if left along will develop into a fully functional human being. The DNA of said zygote says fully human individual. Truly a human being. The only thing stopping this human from drawing their first breath is another human who has been inconvenienced by its presence by no actions of his own but by the actions of the woman carrying it.

Another thing that needs to be taken into account is that abortion noticeably prevents other immoral or unethical actions later on in time. Basically it prevents future crimes and prevents people in the future from becoming victims. It also gives people the chance to break the cycle of poverty and thus improve society as a whole.

Ah, your death now prevents us from seeing you on the street or court system! How very God Damned magnanimous of you! On the other hand you could dig in your pocket, or give of YOUR time, but no, you have the perfect solution, lets just give you the death penalty now, no trial, no jury. Sorry, I'm all about the individual, and his or her freedom. I could care less about any damned group of people.

The only rights you see is the mother of the child, not the child.

A different moral principle counts for you killing the last living thing on Mars. For one, that creature is alive and reached the stage where its self sustaining. The moral principle there is that you should not destroy life needlessly. By killing it for no reason you are in violation of that moral principle and therefor you are unethical.

Key word---needlessly. The child did nothing to get a death sentence and being human deserves all laws applying to being a human.

How is the multicellular organism on Mars deserving law that applies to humans only?

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

Yet you say..."For one, that creature is alive and reached the stage where its self sustaining.", as is the zygote, if left along will develop into a fully functional human being.

Another factually incorrect statement. The zygote will not automatically develop into a fully functioning human being. About 30% or possibly more will not. About 10% of fertilised eggs do not successfully implant. So even leaving it alone will not been it magically develops into a person. If that were the case, the sewers would be crawling with babies.

The DNA of said zygote says fully human individual.

hmmm..its actually a bit more complicated than that. As you've already pointed out, it has the potential to be a human. It needs lots more things before it becomes a human being.

Truly a human being.

No dear. It really isn't.

The only thing stopping this human from drawing their first breath is another human who has been inconvenienced by its presence by no actions of his own but by the actions of the woman carrying it.

You act like pregnancy is some sort of easy magical thing that women just glide through effortlessly with no physical, emotional consequences. Hands up how many here have nearly died in childbirth or because of childbirth complications. *puts hand up*.

Well look at that. Childbirth and pregnancy is dangerous? You mean, you are actually putting an actual human life at risk by forcing her to go through a pregnancy? ..and I am a very healthy female and I was only 23 at the time. I don't have any medical problems that would increase my risk. There are woman out there for whom getting pregnant is a death sentence. You want to tell me about how selfish they are?

Pregnancy and birth are so beyond "inconvenient" that I don't even have words to describe how offensive and ignorant your comments are.

There are two reasons you might not understand this:
1. You've never been pregnant and you never will be
2. You have no empathy for actual human beings. Only imaginary ones.

Ah, your death now prevents us from seeing you on the street or court system! How very God Damned magnanimous of you! On the other hand you could dig in your pocket, or give of YOUR time, but no, you have the perfect solution, lets just give you the death penalty now, no trial, no jury. Sorry, I'm all about the individual, and his or her freedom. I could care less about any damned group of people.

You really don't see women as people deserving of individual freedom do you?

The only rights you see is the mother of the child, not the child.

and you imagine children when there are none.

Key word---needlessly. The child did nothing to get a death sentence and being human deserves all laws applying to being a human.

Its not human yet. You've already admitted this. You are aware that it is only a potential human. You obviously have another agenda here.

How is the multicellular organism on Mars deserving law that applies to humans only?

As yet there is only the potential for there to be a multicellular organism on Mars.
If we find one I fully expect you to risk your life getting in a spaceship and heading off to Mars to protect it. Anything else would be selfish on your part.

I think the dangerous journey is about 9 months to get there. You may not make it and you will never be able to come back. I am sure you are happy to be inconvenienced in this way.

---

Reality Internet Personality

like pregnancy is some sort of easy magical thing that women just glide through effortlessly with no physical, emotional consequences.

Giving birth to a child is one of the most painful things there is in life... (without anaesthesia that is, which I did with my youngest) And the hormones! Oh boy, the hormones, lets not talk about the hormones...

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

like pregnancy is some sort of easy magical thing that women just glide through effortlessly with no physical, emotional consequences.

Giving birth to a child is one of the most painful things there is in life... (without anaesthesia that is, which I did with my youngest) And the hormones! Oh boy, the hormones, lets not talk about the hormones...

I know, right?

I had chronic "morning sickness" through the first one for about 8 months. Morning to night. I lost about 45 lbs by the end of it. It was horrible. Every one said the second one would be different, but it wasn't. Same thing happened again.

I didn't have anaesthesia with the second either, because I wanted a home birth. You can only have gas and air with a home birth, but the valve on the tank broke and it was leaking into the room. The midwife and the father were both high as kites and giggling away.

---

Reality Internet Personality

The midwife and the father were both high as kites and giggling away.

I never yelled to my husband like that before. It's your fault, you did this to me!!! LOL:) He wasn't giggling... That was with my first. 9 hours in labor please!!

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

The midwife and the father were both high as kites and giggling away.

I never yelled to my husband like that before. It's your fault, you did this to me!!! LOL:) He wasn't giggling... That was with my first. 9 hours in labor please!!

LMAO!

I hit the midwife during the birth of my first. She wouldn't let me have more painkiller until she'd checked how far I was dilated. I was like "no, get your f*cking hands of me". I was in so much pain. So was the student Dr who they bought in to observe and who made the mistake of letting me hold his arm.

---

Reality Internet Personality