Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 23:47:57 -0600 From: RichardH <richardh@wsonline.net> To: Dave Hayes <dave@jetcafe.org>, rob spellberg <emailrob@emailrob.com> Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why did evolution fail? Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020828233348.00a8d700@mail.richardh.wsonline.net> In-Reply-To: <200208290506.g7T56I108415@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
All of you fail to realize that everything you are stating is based on "morals" supplied by whatever crap religion it is you support. Break it down to animal basics and the strong survive, the weak will be filtered by natural selection. If you take the "moral" equation out of this discussion it ends. We are organic beings, animals, pretty much like any other. The difference is we have recollection of the past, not just a struggle for the future. If it was brought to the "Utopia" then there would definitely not be 6 billion people of which probably 5 billion are useless swamping this planet :) Just my 2 cents after watching all this for the past 2 days. As stated by a reader in the Denver papers yesterday, for Iraq, we should drop A-bombs on them and then deny we did it. There is no way it could be "proven", I would take this a step further and flatten Jerusalem, Bethlehem and all of the other religious sites that cause all these problems in the world, Vatican included . If these idiots did not have their "holy" sites to fight over peace would possibly be attained. Of course there would be bombings, wars, etc. but after 100-200 years of stuff being paved and radioactive people would get over it. Of course as stated this is based on a "no moral" attack. Can't do that tho, look to the PC status of not just the US but what we do to appease the rest of the world. Flame away but the Jew/Arab/Middle east conflict could be solved by about 6 neutron, no those leave their stupid "holy" sites, lets say hydrogen bombs, about 50MT-100MT each should fix the middle east issue. Then We just deny any involvement, we have bombers that could drop with no detection. At 11:06 PM 8/28/2002, Dave Hayes wrote: >rob spellberg <emailrob@emailrob.com> writes: > >> >> This is because it's terribly frightening to most humans to a) > >> >> be personally responsible for their own actions, b) honor others > >> >> regardless of what they choose to do, c) maintain a state of constant > >> >> present-time awareness, d) follow their own internal codes of conduct, > >> >> e) find their passion, and f) dance their passion into existance. > >> > (d) is problematic. > >> For you, maybe. I find, once I remove the consensual pressure to > >> conform, that it's rather impossible to violate your own internal > >> codes. Remember that you can't say anything about another's > >> violations, just your own. > > actually, [d] --is-- problematic. > > if one person's ICOC includes killing others and > > others ICOC's insist that they not be killed by others, then > > houston, we have a problem. > >I think you misunderstand (d). > >Your ICOC cannot insist actions from others by definition. It's an >internal code of conduct, for how -you- act. > >If you've written "I shall not be killed by others" in your ICOC, >then you're bound to take a martial art, study combat, have umpteen >guns, etc. Or you could study Aikido. > > > in my experience [ i'm 47 ], > > most people are neither enlightened nor aware. > >Granted. > > > consider that there exists a large group of people > > who put forth great effort, just to avoid having "a job". > > all utopias fail because, sooner or later, > > somebody learns how to game the system. > >The utopia I described starts with people who have no need to game the >system. It's pretty far advanced, I doubt our current system could >transition in less than 5000 years without some natural disaster >taking out most of the population of the planet. > > >> Well. Let's see just how much your averagea 4K message will cost you > >> to store. > > the last post was 28k. > >And rare to find a post that long. Look at the troll post sizes. > > > oh, dave. > > the ad_hominem attack; > > questioning your debating opponent's intelligence. > >That's not an ad hominem attack. An ad hominem attack is something >like "Terry you ignorant slut". If you examine the context, you'll >get a better handle on it. > > > you have just declared that, in your own mind, > > you have already lost the argument. > >But I'm not trying to win or lose... > > > graffiti [ except in designated places ] --is-- vandalism. > > in addition, by your own admission, > > it is sometimes a clear and present danger to public safety. > >That doesn't mean it isn't artistic because it is illegal. Some of it >is beautiful. >------ >Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - dave@jetcafe.org > >>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<< > >A person was frighteningly ugly. Once he was asked how could >he go on living with such a terrible face. "Why should I be >unhappy?", answered the man. "I never see my own face; let >others worry." > > > > > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5.1.0.14.0.20020828233348.00a8d700>