My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic Part 10: Vinyl & Octavia Go to White Castle

[Deleted]

There is never a reason. If it hadn't occurred in the first place, it would never need to occur

But it did occur.

What can we then do about it?

[Coffer]

I'm having a good laugh.

[Theklocko]

I was looking for that video aswell.

---------- Post added 2012-09-30 at 06:31 PM ----------



Adolph Hitler. Because of him "literally millions of lives" were ended.

Exactly. For every life saved, another is taken. So what does it matter if someone saves a life, someone else will be taken away all the same.

[Inner Universe]

I was looking for that video aswell.

---------- Post added 2012-09-30 at 06:31 PM ----------



Adolph Hitler. Because of him "literally millions of lives" were ended.

So you really aren't following this discussion at all are you. Adolf Hitler has nothing to do with what my position is.

[Freyera]

But it did occur.

What can we then do about it?

Someone needs to man up and stop the cycle.

Not saying this applies to your situation.

[BloodyAngel12]

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one.

[Temp name]

So you really aren't following this discussion at all are you. Adolf Hitler has nothing to do with what my position is.

Except the fact that the person could just as well be the next Jonas Stalk as the next Adolph Hitler.

Also, http://www.charitywater.org/donate/ Under the "Sponser a water project." Read that.

[Theklocko]

So you really aren't following this discussion at all are you. Adolf Hitler has nothing to do with what my position is.

You pointed us to a person who saved millions of lives. He pointed you to a person that has taken millions of lives. I see nothing wrong with this.

[Temp name]

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one.

Exactly Nikki.

[Deleted]

Adolph Hitler. Because of him "literally millions of lives" were ended.

Well, many would argue that Hitler was also a good thing. He killed many, but his war saved many too. People without jobs could join the army, shelters were given out to people without homes. A common enemy makes us work together, take care of whoever ain't an enemy.

It's not black and white.

Someone needs to man up and stop the cycle.

Not saying this applies to your situation.

But what if the cycle only can be stopped by hurting other people?

[Temp name]

Well, many would argue that Hitler was also a good thing. He killed many, but his war saved many too. People without jobs could join the army, shelters were given out to people without homes. A common enemy makes us work together, take care of whoever ain't an enemy.

It's not black and white.

I do know it's not black and white, but the fact is he still ended millions of lives. Also (to stick with the WW2 thing), Josef Stalin.

[kortin]

Adolph Hitler. Because of him "literally millions of lives" were ended.

That discussion lasted longer than I expected. But ends the same.

[Inner Universe]

Except the fact that the person could just as well be the next Jonas Stalk as the next Adolph Hitler.

Also, http://www.charitywater.org/donate/ Under the "Sponser a water project." Read that.

That isn't the point.

You are arguing that murdering someone for money and then donating the money to charity outweighs the murder. This is easily proven false by a SINGLE example of one person doing something equal to or greater than something a charity could do with one million dollars. I've already proven it false with the example of Jonas Salk who cured polio. That alone has saved more lives than hundreds of charities.

Instead of murdering someone and then donating money, you could just work hard and get a job that puts you into a position to donate money without murdering anyone. Then you can still donate one million dollars to charity of your choice, but you do it without murdering another human being, a human being which could potentially be the next Jonas Salk.

Both scenarios result in money going to <insert charity here>, but one scenario does selflessly and one does it by being a murderer. Human beings are fairly lazy these days and would just like to press one button and feel good about themselves, but the reality is that isn't how things work.

[Freyera]

Well, many would argue that Hitler was also a good thing. He killed many, but his war saved many too. People without jobs could join the army, shelters were given out to people without homes. A common enemy makes us work together, take care of whoever ain't an enemy.

It's not black and white.


But what if the cycle only can be stopped by hurting other people?

Is it an act of assholism, to stop a vicious cycle? What can be defined as perpetuating the cycle and stopping the cycle? Killing a murderer stops them from murdering, but teaches someone else that murdering is okay.

I live by the commandment, "Do unto others, as you would have done unto you." If we all took 2 seconds, and thought about how our actions would affect someone else, and how they would feel about it, we could all get along much better

[Temp name]

That isn't the point.

You are arguing that murdering someone for money and then donating the money to charity outweighs the murder. This is easily proven false by a SINGLE example of one person doing something equal to or greater than something a charity could do with one million dollars. I've already proven it false with the example of Jonas Salk who cured polio. That alone has saved more lives than hundreds of charities.

Instead of murdering someone and then donating money, you could just work hard and get a job that puts you into a position to donate money without murdering anyone. Then you can still donate one million dollars to charity of your choice, but you do it without murdering another human being, a human being which could potentially be the next Jonas Salk.

Both scenarios result in money going to <insert charity here>, but one scenario does selflessly and one does it by being a murderer. Human beings are fairly lazy these days and would just like to press one button and feel good about themselves, but the reality is that isn't how things work.

The fact is my point still counters your point. The fact that I killed that one person might save millions of others.

Also on a completely unrelated note, I have to go eat dinner now. If this is still going on when I come back, I'll gladly rejoin.

[Deleted]

I do know it's not black and white, but the fact is he still ended millions of lives. Also (to stick with the WW2 thing), Josef Stalin.

Every hero is also a terrorist.

[Inner Universe]

The fact is my point still counters your point. The fact that I killed that one person might save millions of others.

Also on a completely unrelated note, I have to go eat dinner now. If this is still going on when I come back, I'll gladly rejoin.

You can't just say "LAWL MY POINT BEATS URS" without a logical argument to back it up. I've logically explained to you why you are incorrect multiple times. You seem unable to wrap your head around very simple logic. I cba to repeat it again.

[Theklocko]

You know, I got shit to do. As much as I would just LOVE to stick around and argue with an asshole with just as corrupt views as mine (and a lot of other people in this thread), I have more important things to do. I'll be back later.

[Deleted]

Godwin's law strikes this thread as well.

[Deleted]

Is it an act of assholism, to stop a vicious cycle? What can be defined as perpetuating the cycle and stopping the cycle? Killing a murderer stops them from murdering, but teaches someone else that murdering is okay.

I live by the commandment, "Do unto others, as you would have done unto you." If we all took 2 seconds, and thought about how our actions would affect someone else, and how they would feel about it, we could all get along much better

I live by the same commandment. It's the only one that is logical enough for me.

But now we're at a different place than we were. If we do evil with good intentions, then it can be justified. It all depends on the situation.

This is exactly what Master does in Fallout 1.