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: one_less who wrote (70997)	7/25/2003 11:27:08 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Ah! But if the definition of murder is so broad that it can include or exclude whatever a person or society wants, it becomes operationally meaningless. If it can be narrowed such that cannibalism and human sacrifice can be excluded at will, nothing is left. Their ancesters don't see it that way either. I dispute that. They saw them as guilty of exactly nothing but getting caught by Aztec or Maya warriors. That's all. That's all that was necessary. They need be guilty of nothing but that. The Aztecs believed the universe would end if the sun god was not fed human hearts. Those hearts need be guilty of nothing. Now where is the definition of murder? And if the western definition of murder is not a societal construct, but an "absolute", why did those people not know it?