• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

do being that are not sentient deserve moral treatment ?

should you feel sorry for somebody who doesn't exist ?


  • Total voters
    7

NEUROSPORT

Banned
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
616
Reaction score
41
Location
Silicon Valley
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
i have come to the conclusion that most people are not conscious most of the time.

every day i feel less and less motivated to argue with people because i see that they are ultimately not capable of understanding anything.

question is - should i feel sorry for or try to help people who as far as i am concerned do not intellectually exist ?

i mean if you are attacked by a rabid dog - do you feel sorry for the dog ? do you argue with it ? or do you shoot it ?

i mean there is a dfiference between makign a mistake, being incapacitated by drugs and/or alcohol and simply not having a brain.

if you make a mistake i feel sorry for you. if you are drunk maybe ill catch up with you when you're in better shape. but if if you are just physically incapable of understanding ANYTHING, EVER, AT ALL ... how am i supposed to feel about a person like that ? this is most people mind you.
 
Last edited:
Dude seriously, did you take your medication today?

This sounds like some kind of dark high school emo rant?
 
this guy in another thread said that instead of developing alternative energy technologies we should lower speed limits to reduce our energy use.

for a BRIEF MOMENT i contemplated how to counter that then i thought - wait a minute ? am i seriously going to reply to that ?

if a person is so brilliant that he cannot understand that i DONT GIVE A F*CK what he thinks about the speed i should be driving at - is there anything i could relly communicate to him ?

so i just closed the window. but these people are everywhere. it bothers me that i am classified into the same species with them. except for the phenotype we have nothing in common. how do we just grant everybody who can walk upright the "sapiens" privilege ?
 
this guy in another thread said that instead of developing alternative energy technologies we should lower speed limits to reduce our energy use.

for a BRIEF MOMENT i contemplated how to counter that then i thought - wait a minute ? am i seriously going to reply to that ?

if a person is so brilliant that he cannot understand that i DONT GIVE A F*CK what he thinks about the speed i should be driving at - is there anything i could relly communicate to him ?

so i just closed the window. but these people are everywhere. it bothers me that i am classified into the same species with them. except for the phenotype we have nothing in common. how do we just grant everybody who can walk upright the "sapiens" privilege ?

Wow...full of yourself much? Perhaps you should look at yourself before you ask such questions. Because speaking this way shows nothing more than that you think that you are better than everyone else that doesn't think like you.

It is a fact that reducing speed means less gas used as the faster you go the more energy you need. Einstein's law of relativity shows that. Why not do as that person suggested PLUS invent new technologies and energy sources?
 
i have come to the conclusion that most people are not conscious most of the time.

every day i feel less and less motivated to argue with people because i see that they are ultimately not capable of understanding anything.

question is - should i feel sorry for or try to help people who as far as i am concerned do not intellectually exist ?

i mean if you are attacked by a rabid dog - do you feel sorry for the dog ? do you argue with it ? or do you shoot it ?

i mean there is a dfiference between makign a mistake, being incapacitated by drugs and/or alcohol and simply not having a brain.

if you make a mistake i feel sorry for you. if you are drunk maybe ill catch up with you when you're in better shape. but if if you are just physically incapable of understanding ANYTHING, EVER, AT ALL ... how am i supposed to feel about a person like that ? this is most people mind you.

NEUROSPORT, I'll pay you $1,000,000 if I can find someone more elitist and snobby than you. (Hint: this is impossible)
 
this guy in another thread said that instead of developing alternative energy technologies we should lower speed limits to reduce our energy use.

for a BRIEF MOMENT i contemplated how to counter that then i thought - wait a minute ? am i seriously going to reply to that ?

if a person is so brilliant that he cannot understand that i DONT GIVE A F*CK what he thinks about the speed i should be driving at - is there anything i could relly communicate to him ?


so i just closed the window. but these people are everywhere. it bothers me that i am classified into the same species with them. except for the phenotype we have nothing in common. how do we just grant everybody who can walk upright the "sapiens" privilege ?

You are steering from idiot territory to troll territory at the bolded part. I'm starting to even doubt you even believe the crap you're always saying. You probably just get laughs when fools like me take you seriously.
 
this guy in another thread said that instead of developing alternative energy technologies we should lower speed limits to reduce our energy use.

That was probably me. I was pointing out that the government wants to invest billions into alternative fuels and ways in which to save energy consumption. My reply was is they were truely worried about saving fuel they could achieve saving millions of gallons of oil per year and cost next to nothing. They could achieve this by lowering the speed limits back to 55 mph. I do not remember the numbers off hand but it takes significantly more fuel to run the same distance at 75 vs 55.
 
Why not do as that person suggested PLUS invent new technologies and energy sources?

oh he can walk for all i care. i am amazed at his arrogance to think he has the right to dictate to other people how we should live. and he thinks he is doing this for our own good. and he probably thinks he is a humble person too. and he probably is - he just doesn't have a concept of anything.
 
I'm starting to even doubt you even believe the crap you're always saying. You probably just get laughs when fools like me take you seriously.

no Dav i am serious most of the time although i often use sarcasm.

i have to admit though the "internet must be banned!" thread was just supposed to test how many crazy people are on this board :)
 
That was probably me. I was pointing out that the government wants to invest billions into alternative fuels and ways in which to save energy consumption. My reply was is they were truely worried about saving fuel they could achieve saving millions of gallons of oil per year and cost next to nothing. They could achieve this by lowering the speed limits back to 55 mph. I do not remember the numbers off hand but it takes significantly more fuel to run the same distance at 75 vs 55.

actually it wasn't you but it just goes to show that this kind of thinking is widespread.

we could simply ban cars you know. and the people who build cars in detroit right now - they could be paid by the government to paint grass green.

also instead of living in houses they could live in dormitories next to their jobs this way saving a lot of energy in winter on heating - they would use their own body heat !
 
Last edited:
i have come to the conclusion that most people are not conscious most of the time.

every day i feel less and less motivated to argue with people because i see that they are ultimately not capable of understanding anything.

question is - should i feel sorry for or try to help people who as far as i am concerned do not intellectually exist ?

i mean if you are attacked by a rabid dog - do you feel sorry for the dog ? do you argue with it ? or do you shoot it ?

i mean there is a dfiference between makign a mistake, being incapacitated by drugs and/or alcohol and simply not having a brain.

if you make a mistake i feel sorry for you. if you are drunk maybe ill catch up with you when you're in better shape. but if if you are just physically incapable of understanding ANYTHING, EVER, AT ALL ... how am i supposed to feel about a person like that ? this is most people mind you.

Umm ... it may be my lack of sleep but someone please tell me i am not the only one who has no clue what he is going on about :/
 
oh he can walk for all i care. i am amazed at his arrogance to think he has the right to dictate to other people how we should live. and he thinks he is doing this for our own good. and he probably thinks he is a humble person too. and he probably is - he just doesn't have a concept of anything.

In case you hadn't noticed but pretty much every state has some sort of speed limit laws. Driving is not a right. It is a priviledge. Which is why you can be denied a drivers license.

Suggesting a lower speed limit is not telling you how to live anyways. Telling you what to eat, how to eat, how to dress, what shows to like, what shows not to like etc etc etc is telling you how to live.

In anycase technically he does have a right to tell you how to live. Along with every other person that votes. As you have a right to do also. If he didn't then people could kill other people without breaking any laws...as there would be no laws against killing.
 
that's what you've been brainwashed to believe.

in fact nobody has the right to tell me how to live.

USA was founded as a constitutional republic, not a democracy.

Republic vs. Democracy

This does not stop me from being able to tell you what I like. To live, what to eat anything. Freedom of speech baby! :mrgreen:

PS I know what you mean, but it is to much fun to poke fun.

Man lighten up and be happy. :)
 
Last edited:
First, I would accept everyone in Earth being a little retarded if at the same time they became kind. There are worse things than stupidity.

Second, I never assume that I'm going to convince someone who posts on political boards-- but I might convince someone who reads them. My posts and the responses to them are form the structure of a dichotomy that might benefit others.

Third, I feel sorry for anything I have to kill.

Fourth, chill.
 
Last edited:
does anybody really read political forums and not post on them ?
I certainly have.

You should also understand that your stuff might be read years from now. This is the best argument for using good grammar and an expanded vocabulary. The search engines are always becoming more sophisticated, and will increasingly attempt to assess the quality of the material they index.

My, for lack of a better term let's say "sect," believes that there is tremendous value in enlightening even one individual, but stresses that we only rarely understand the positive influences we have on people we never suspect.

One more thing I'll tell you, and please hear it in the light of the fact that I wouldn't bother with anyone who I thought couldn't understand. We are all idiots at one time of another. Men just need ask their fathers if that has ever been true about themselves. What was that old song? It had lyrics that went, "everyone plays the Fool, no exceptions to the rule."
 
that's what you've been brainwashed to believe.

in fact nobody has the right to tell me how to live.

USA was founded as a constitutional republic, not a democracy.

Republic vs. Democracy

From your own link.

Republic. That form of government in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whome those powers are specially delegated. [NOTE: The word "people" may be either plural or singular. In a republic the group only has advisory powers; the sovereign individual is free to reject the majority group-think. USA/exception: if 100% of a jury convicts, then the individual loses sovereignty and is subject to group-think as in a democracy.]

We vote for a representitive correct? We expect that representitive to champion our causes. Which includes driving restrictions, and can include everything else..including how you should eat, what you should eat, what shows you should watch, etc etc etc. If that representitive does not champion the causes that we demand of them then they will not get re-elected. And if you truely believe that we can ignore any law that is passed just because you think that it is just "advise" then I have a little homework for ya. Go out and break someones window. See what happens.

You are right that we are a republic. But we are also a democracy. We may not have any real say directly in any laws passed by Congress or the Senate. But we do indirectly through our representitives. And even further through jury nullification.

Of course this is all on a federal level. On a state level people can and do vote for laws. Don't believe me? Then look up Prop 8 in California.
 
You should also understand that your stuff might be read years from now. This is the best argument for using good grammar and an expanded vocabulary.

we are approaching singularity ( an artificial intelligence explostion resulting from a critical mass giving rise to a chain reaction ). predicting the future beyond that point is impossible.
 
Last edited:
i have come to the conclusion that most people are not conscious most of the time.

every day i feel less and less motivated to argue with people because i see that they are ultimately not capable of understanding anything.

question is - should i feel sorry for or try to help people who as far as i am concerned do not intellectually exist ?

i mean if you are attacked by a rabid dog - do you feel sorry for the dog ? do you argue with it ? or do you shoot it ?

i mean there is a dfiference between makign a mistake, being incapacitated by drugs and/or alcohol and simply not having a brain.

if you make a mistake i feel sorry for you. if you are drunk maybe ill catch up with you when you're in better shape. but if if you are just physically incapable of understanding ANYTHING, EVER, AT ALL ... how am i supposed to feel about a person like that ? this is most people mind you.

I'm gonna tell you just like I told the last angsty person I came across on this forum today...

You need to stop taking yourself and the world so seriously. Or you are gonna die a lonely death.

Go smell a lilac or an orchid, have a good glass of wine or whiskey, smoke a joint, get a piece of hot ass, swim naked in a cold river, or taste a morsel of the most decadent and exquisite food imaginable. Get a passion that brings you joy. And then get back to us. Seriously.
 
First, I would accept everyone in Earth being a little retarded if at the same time they became kind. There are worse things than stupidity.

I wouldn't. Not in a million years. The average person is depressingly stupid enough... I can't imagine living in a world in which the majority of people were below the (current) average.

And I would disagree, as well. There are many flaws and vices in this world, and I would say that the worst by far is stupidity-- if for no other reason than no person has only a single flaw, and stupidity not only makes every other flaw that much worse, it makes people unaware of them.

If I had to choose, I'd rather spend the rest of my life in a cell with Dr. Mengele and Vlad Tepes than be forced to live in a group home with my former clients. And if indulging the former is what is necessary to rid the world of the latter... that's a price I would readily pay.

Go smell a lilac or an orchid, have a good glass of wine or whiskey, smoke a joint, get a piece of hot ass, swim naked in a cold river, or taste a morsel of the most decadent and exquisite food imaginable. Get a passion that brings you joy. And then get back to us. Seriously.

We live in a beautiful world. Everything we could ever need or want is just outside, ripe for the taking, and all we have to do is be strong enough to take it. There's no sense in spending your life hating the world, because hating the world doesn't change it; there are only two ways to really change the world and to be able to live happily within it. The first is to love the world enough to want to make it better, and the second is to love yourself enough to take whatever you want from the world without guilt or hesitation.

I'm not there yet, but I'm reaching for it.
 
I have argued briefly with the OP writer about the speed limit. It became clear that he is not in the least bid educated on energy issues, much like too many of our politicians.:2razz:


http://www.debatepolitics.com/alternative-energy/48421-energy-sources-comparison-2.html

He starts at post 12, and clearly he does not understand technology related to energy issues, but he wants a say anyway. Sort of like our politicians, they say the dumbest things that they think are true, because some other politician said it....

Fact is, if the government was seriously wanting to import less oil from the middle east, we would have lower speed limits. It worked in the 70's, it could certainly help now.
 
Last edited:
nazi_poster2.jpg


they cost too much, ya?
 
Back
Top Bottom