Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (4221)	1/31/2001 10:24:11 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I would support killing in a war with just aims and where the killing was related to achieving those aims, but that becomes an extention of self defense or defense of others See, this kind of hypocrisy just unwinds me!! Did you support the war in the Persian Gulf to "free the people of Kuwait"? That was a really, really big stretch to your self-defense argument, IMO. Strategically important, yes, but self-defense, hardly. Kuwait is(was) a monarchy where 90% of the citizens have(had) no right to choose their government. This kind of looks like something other than a democratic republic, but heck, what do I know? When you see Iraqi's with tumors the size of cantaloupes growing on their shoulders, backs and legs, it kind of looks bad for us. You are not entitled to kill your assailant, his wife, kids, grandfather, grandmother, aunts, uncles, mother, father, brothers, sisters and cousins because you fear for your life. Or is this collateral damage somehow okay because it is 8000 miles from your family. A similar argument could be made for most of the "Wars" that the US has been involved in since WWII. Panama, Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua and Granada come to mind as well. These abominations make abortions look like humanitarian aid to the needy. I just can't get that excited about the blob of cells with less development than a shrimp.

To: TimF who wrote (4221)	2/1/2001 1:21:18 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

"Generally I am against killing people when it is not intended to defend or protect but is rather done because of hate or greed or convenience. " But the question is WHY are you against killing people for hate, greed or convenience? I would argue that abortions are not usually done for any of those reasons, and so your reasons are not germane to abortion, but let's leave that aside for the moment- because none of what you said answers the question of WHY it is wrong. So why is it wrong?