Is world peace possible?
- Yes
- No
- Whatever,…
0
voters
What in the hell…
what about community service from prison workers? i’m sure they don’t want to clean up the environment all that much but it sure helps out a lot.
why is it wrong to sometimes force a person to do something they do not want to do? sometimes a child does not want to go to the dentist but if they do not they will get cavities and their teeth will fall out.
it’s not necessarily wrong to force someone to do something they do not want to do. sometimes it’s much easier for someone else to see what they MUST do, apart from what they want to do, and then they only way for it to get done is to force them to do it.
Doesn’t stop me,
Come near my family, see what I do.
Wrong is a point of view, a religious point of view at that.
It will never work. What if I truly want to chop down all the trees. They don’t have opinions so you can’t stop me. What a crock fulla crap.
LMFAO, ok, what if i don’t want to stop killing you.
ok
ok, but i own the ground your walking on, and i don’t want you on it, get off
why not? you did wrong to me, i do it back to you. fair is fair, eye for an eye
these are too simple, they solve no problems, just make the someone who said them feel better about them selves.
it’s like people who respond to “some time you have to choose the lesser of two evils” with “yes but your still choosing evil” it dosn’t solve the problem, you still have to choose, world peace is only possable on the sun, where most things die as soon as they get near
And?
Something that one person sees as wrong could be right to someone else. The original poster sees killing people as wrong, I see it is population control. Yet again we go back to survival of the fittest, the world is a constant battle for food, mates, and land. With world peace the earth would be overrun with humans.
thank you
I must add…
In several situations its justifiable to take more than an eye. Excessive punishment in the past could prevent scenarios in the future. They take your eye you not only take their eye, you take their hand aswell - in the future they will remember it is wrong to harm people.
Incorrect.
“Wrong” is an adjectorial definition of a consequential effect measured against an intrinsic/extrinsic value system resulting in a belief that the stated outcome was not of benefit to the perceiving entity.
Bereft of the necessity of invoking religion. Your interjection from a slanted, negative mentality.
And from the perceiving entity’s point of view they believe it was not in their favor.
I fail to see your point.
thesun1 wrote:
i think it’s wrong to take more then the eye, it results in, at best, hurt feelings, and that results in counter attacks. this is part of what really causes the continuation of violence (i’m not anti violence, just anti-excessive violence in some situations) and it’s hard to find the line, very hard
that is one of the coldest things i have ever heard.
It’s a way to teach a lesson. Lets continue to use the law of retaliation, eye for an eye. A man comes up to me and takes my eye, I in turn do the same to him. Since it was middle ground he learns nothing. But if I took more from him then he did from me he would then fear the consequences. The fear of lose prevents someone from carrying out an action.
It is like a set of scales, as long as their gain from an action is less than their loss than it will be unbalanced and they will not repeat the action.
Well, allow me to thank you all for having taken the time, if not for your cynacism.
If you put on your ‘who is forcing the issue’ lenses, it should be come quite clear to you that absent extenuating information killing me is the initial force that is creating the conflict. That should not be tolerated.
If you enter into my life and I refuse to toe your line, it’s you that’s wrong to use force on me, if I enter into your sphere and you don’t like it, it’s wrong for me to continue to force you to acknowledge that I exist, but once I go away, it’s again wrong for you to hunt me down and kill me.
As I see it we can bounce along in our aura bubbles having total freedom provided we don’t force each other to do something we don’t want to do, I know that if you leave me alone, I’ll leave you alone.
Within these parameters conflict is not possible. Peace is unavoidable.
But,…
When you advocate the use of force, a peaceful resolution is not possible, and it is the absolute responsiblity of the attacked to end your violent behaviors.
So,…
It’s a poor state of the union that keeps the potheads from having all out street wars with those that would use force to keep them from getting high.
It’s a sure sign that every driver that grudgingly puts on his seat belt is a coward. He fears the forces arrayed against him.
Every man that doesn’t create his own fireworks display has bowed down to the force.
Every time you are speeding and you slow down when you see a trooper on the highway it’s because you are his bitch.
When you read about your taxes taken from your check, just tell yourself whatever you need to hear so you can forget that you are not the baddest presence in the valley.
Recorded history only tells of that those most willing to use force allow it to tell.
Open your eyes, Bakunin said it in 1850. Crime is the exclusive domain of the sovereign.
Who needs criminals most? Cops. Judges. Politicians. Bail Bondsmen. Journalists. Insurance agents. Morticians.
Is it any wonder that your education has you dead set against what I’ve said?
Do you wonder why they trap you in a ‘school’ that when you are finished you still aren’t qualified to work at McD’s.
The powermongers want a dependent population.
If there were no crime there would be no ‘government’.
Once all are taught that getting your way through the use of force is not gonna be tolerated, we’ll have world peace, we couldn’t have anything else.
Enslavement of those that use force against you is ok with me. It’s less negative than killing them. Perhaps they can redeem themselves.
A child can be lead to water but they have to learn to drink. You may force your child to do anything you want, but it doesn’t make it right. That will be between you, your child, and whatever ultimate authority you recognize.
My life was given to me. Only me and my ultimate authority can decide what is right, or wrong, for me. When you say that you know better you are horning in on the ultimate authority’s rightful place. You are not god, I am not property, you need to butt your nose out of my business.
You are engaging in a contradiction when you say I want a free country, but then advocate the enslavement of potheads, speed freaks, speeders, tax evaders, prostitutes, porn stars, whatever particular strain of freedom you are not willing to engage in yourself. I can still sky dive right?
I gotta go, if I missed something, please feel free to point it out.
-Imp
remember there is a reason for the seat belt 
Yes I am, but he is saving lives so I will continue to be his bitch.
The criminal needs the criminal, crime is always the result of a need.
Communism will never happen because people can’t get along, period.
It’s mutual and as a part of the middle class I’m happy to be where I am.
No crime?
Isn’t going to be tolerated by who? Who will back this up? If you are going to use the word ‘tolerated’ then there needs to be an enforcing branch.
how about this for world peace in 20 words or less (granted, i still think this is wrong, but closer to the actual goal)
it is wrong to create any kind of rule or law that does not benefit the greater society.
Basically a democracy, we don’t have too many laws that go against society…
Except no whaling laws in Ohio, can you believe that rubbish, we are being oppressed I tell you!
jk jk jk… continue on with the conversation…