If the govt. legalized murder, would you then belive it was morally acceptable?

[Jarod]

Which soldier should be tried for dropping the bombs? If they should not be tried, their action isn't 'murder'. Tell me why they shouldn't be tried.

This doesn't change that the leaders can be tried. There is an intent in misleading, if you believe that is what was done, that would change what their action caused. However the soldier themselves, what of their action in dropping the bomb was "murder"?

I agree, and use the same argement against those who are calling abortion murder. THAT IS MY POINT!

 

[uscitizen]

so hiring a hit man does not make the one hiring equally guilty to the actual killer Damo ?

But then there is a difference the troops have no choice.
So the resoposibility for the killing all falls on those directing them.

 

[Damocles]

And so, the act of bombing can never be murder, because if you call it murder then the troops are murderers.

I'd say it was a clever arguement, but it really isn't. It's dishonest and outright silly.

When the United states bombed Iraq, on a lie and a pretense, it was an act of mass-murder. Most directly responsible, and therefore, legally responsible, are Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and about 2 or 3 dozen other highly ranked, or formerly highly ranking officials. They can and should be tried and executed for war crimes.

Those whom are responsible but morally, not legally, include the soldiers who carried out the orders, and, in a far greater number, the true moral culprits who enabled the perpetruaters, enumerated in the first paragraph; the american taxpayer.

We all have blood on our hands. Whether or not we, you, me, the soldiers, are technically "murderers" is a high-minded philosophical debate the outcome of which changes nothing.

But I will tell you this...there is not a hero among us.

BS it is dishonest. Dishonest is to call somebody a murderer for participating in the war, then say that they shouldn't be tried.

It is direct.

I point out that the leaders should be tried if you think it is 'unjust' not the soldiers who upheld their end of the social contract and the more direct contract that they signed.

It is you who dishonestly pretend that there is no difference in our social constructs between the two.

 

[Cancel7]

BS it is dishonest. Dishonest is to call somebody a murderer for participating in the war, then say that they shouldn't be tried.

It is direct.

I point out that the leaders should be tried if you think it is 'unjust' not the soldiers who upheld their end of the social contract and the more direct contract that they signed.

Sorry, I've already ripped your argument to shreds on this thread, and won the debate.

Your insistence on repeating over and over your silly, now rebutted argument, doesn't change that. Unlike you, I won't type the same thing over and over.

you lost.

 

[Jarod]

BS it is dishonest. Dishonest is to call somebody a murderer for participating in the war, then say that they shouldn't be tried.

It is direct.

I point out that the leaders should be tried if you think it is 'unjust' not the soldiers who upheld their end of the social contract and the more direct contract that they signed.

It is you who dishonestly pretend that there is no difference in our social constructs between the two.

And its dishonest to call an abortionist a murder.

 

[Damocles]

Sorry, I've already ripped your argument to shreds on this thread, and won the debate.

Your insistence on repeating over and over your silly, now rebutted argument, doesn't change that. Unlike you, I won't type the same thing over and over.

you lost.

You've done nothing of the sort. This is like a twelve year old proclaiming victory in an unfinished chess match and upsetting the board.

 

[Damocles]

And its dishonest to call an abortionist a murder.

When have I done that?

Society gives them permission to do such a thing.

I call them an abortionist.

 

[Jarod]

When have I done that?

Society gives them permission to do such a thing.

I call them an abortionist.

You have not, but others were, I hope they are reading... and my point is illistrated.

 

[Damocles]

You've done nothing of the sort. This is like a twelve year old proclaiming victory in an unfinished chess match and upsetting the board.

In this thread I have suggested that society allows for certain actions and that permission makes things more socially acceptable.

I have stated that in a war, it is the leader's intent that might make the activity wrong, but the soldiers follow their part of the contract.

I have had others say the same thing and proclaim me "wrong" because of it. It's inane to take a partisan position, not read my posts, then proclaim a victory because you refuse to actually comprehend what a person states over your own assumptions of what you want them to believe.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

And its dishonest to call an abortionist a murder.

Under current laws that make people like you feel better, you are correct. They are not murderers.

But the fact remains, they deliberately end a unique human life. When you do so out of convenience... that is murder (my opinion)

 

[leaningright]

And its dishonest to call an abortionist a murder.

Nope. It is what they are doing, hence what they are...with an "er" at the end of the word. Premeditated killing of an innocent human being. By Webster's definition that is murder. You can pull out the war analogy all you want but that is not the same thing.

I have hesitated to comment on this thread because most everyone here knows where I stand on the issue of abortion and know that they either agree or disagree. No matter, I couldn't keep my big mouth shut.

 

[uscitizen]

Sorry, I've already ripped your argument to shreds on this thread, and won the debate.

Your insistence on repeating over and over your silly, now rebutted argument, doesn't change that. Unlike you, I won't type the same thing over and over.

you lost.

Yep he is crawfishin big time.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Nope. It is what they are doing, hence what they are...with an "er" at the end of the word. Premeditated killing of an innocent human being. By Webster's definition that is murder. You can pull out the war analogy all you want but that is not the same thing.

I have hesitated to comment on this thread because most everyone here knows where I stand on the issue of abortion and know that they either agree or disagree. No matter, I couldn't keep my big mouth shut.

Not to worry, you are not alone. This is one issue I cannot seem to resist. Even though everyone on here should be quite clear where I stand on the issue already, I still feel the need to comment.

 

[uscitizen]

Nope. It is what they are doing, hence what they are...with an "er" at the end of the word. Premeditated killing of an innocent human being. By Webster's definition that is murder. You can pull out the war analogy all you want but that is not the same thing.

I have hesitated to comment on this thread because most everyone here knows where I stand on the issue of abortion and know that they either agree or disagree. No matter, I couldn't keep my big mouth shut.

I respect you for that too. The difference is we don't see you on here as a pro Iraq war type. There is the conflict some of us on here see.
Wars are sometimes a necessary evil, this was is not one of those.

 

[Damocles]

Not to worry, you are not alone. This is one issue I cannot seem to resist. Even though everyone on here should be quite clear where I stand on the issue already, I still feel the need to comment.

Well, I am the 'engineer' until it is illegal, it won't be murder. It will just be an unjustifiable, but legal, killing, IMO.

 

[Damocles]

I respect you for that too. The difference is we don't see you on here as a pro Iraq war type. There is the conflict some of us on here see.
Wars are sometimes a necessary evil, this was is not one of those.

When have I ever been a "pro" Iraq type? This is total BS, like your "Uh-huh" comment from earlier.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I respect you for that too. The difference is we don't see you on here as a pro Iraq war type. There is the conflict some of us on here see.
Wars are sometimes a necessary evil, this was is not one of those.

Yet what you fail to see is that the Iraq war has NOTHING to do with abortion. That is simply the standard bullshit fallback that you and others like to use to try to justify your actions/positions. Oh well... it isn't as bad as Iraq so it must be ok... that type of thinking is not only incorrect (over a million dead kids from abortion every year) but it is a pathetic attempt to divert from the issue of abortion taking a human life.

 

[uscitizen]

When have I ever been a "pro" Iraq type? This is total BS, like your "Uh-huh" comment from earlier.

Umm the old we need to stay a while stuff Damo.
That is the latest pro war rhetoric.
since the other 5 or 6 reasons have been proven false.

 

[Damocles]

Umm the old we need to stay a while stuff Damo.
That is the latest pro war rhetoric.
since the other 5 or 6 reasons have been proven false.

And? This means that I think undeclared war is "good"? Total BS.

Who is "crawfishing"?

 

[uscitizen]

Yet what you fail to see is that the Iraq war has NOTHING to do with abortion. That is simply the standard bullshit fallback that you and others like to use to try to justify your actions/positions. Oh well... it isn't as bad as Iraq so it must be ok... that type of thinking is not only incorrect (over a million dead kids from abortion every year) but it is a pathetic attempt to divert from the issue of abortion taking a human life.

All unjustified killing is morally murder SF. Case closed.