Originally posted by mmQ
Its like a bunch of people moved into your hosue and you had room for rthem because you have a mansion and then they're all taking their arguments to the living room which like, fuck you, its not your living room ya know we dont want to hear your shit take it to the BEDROOM, but there isn't necessarily a bedroom so you just keep going to the living room bvecause it is all you knows and obviously we are like what the fuck we're trying to watch alaska state troopers fuck off to your room please and you do but we can still hear ya talking through the walls hahaha.
LALALALLA im drunk now so would you just have sex with me sometime when I can get to ya that would be great I promise it will be fast and easy except it wont because I'm good but I mean every guy says that so lets just have some nice quiet breakfast sex and move onwith our lives????????????????????????????
I googled how to deal with weird fully formed social cliques appearing in your hilbert's hotel (heu heu) of a house and carrying along years of drama and being weirded out by it but also having your own years of drama and feeling hypocritical for thinking their drama is gay but the results were mostly porn.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Originally posted by cupocheer
HAVING SAID THAT: NOT THAT I HAVE TO EXPLAIN ANYTHING TO YOU – I DIDN'T "INTENTIONALLY" BUMP A BUNCH OF OLD THREADS YETERDAY. I WAS "TRAPPED" ON YOUR FREEKIN' SITE AND COUDNT GET BACK INTO THE CURRENT STREAM OF POSTS. THATS YOUR FKN PROBLEM TO FIGURE OUT,NOT MINE.
The administration humbly apologizes that you became trapped in our website. While it can never make up the the traumatic event you had to endure, we'd like to offer a coupon for one free account on NiS, all the costs of development, operations, and maintenance 100% covered as a token of appreciation of your continued support of our forum.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Originally posted by -SpectraL
I meant to say vertebrates.
Yes, the CNS of vertebrates does include the spinal cord. That does not mean that if an animal does not have a spine, that it also doesn't have a CNS. Don't believe me? Here's a study where the researchers specifically mention the CNS of a species of ants in the title:
It took like 30 seconds to google that, you could have avoided this embarrassing situation if you had taken the time to do that search before posting incorrect information. That's less time than it took you to make the post defending your wrong point, or than it will take you to reply to this one. End it cheap spectral and do the 30 seconds of research required to find out you're dead wrong.
Originally posted by benny vader
so do insects have or not have central nervous system ???
Yes, they do. Spectral is just unwilling to admit he was wrong.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
"son, we need to talk. I had hoped we would never have to have this conversation but the time has come. Brands New is for faggots who cut themselves, this has to stop."
"You just don't get it ma, God and the Devil was a seminal work that capstoned and defined a number of disparate musical threads running throughout the late 90s and 2000s."
"It's worse than I thought, I'm calling 911"
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Originally posted by -SpectraL
Infinityshock intentionally self destructed, basically because he's pissed at all the childish, shallow and practically contentless posts being made across the BBS.
Right, because literally thousands of variations on "bend over and spread them purdy" is definitely not childish, shallow, and practically contentless.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Originally posted by Malice
Without any of the things that naturally drive people to continue to live I don't think I can function and endure this. Some people really are in a state where suicide is understandable, and a compassionate response wouldn't condemn it or see it as negative outcome relative to the alternative.
Yes, yes, but no one is in a state where endlessly talking about suicide and complaining about ever detail of your life while doing nothing is OK. My compassionate response is to shut the fuck up.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Originally posted by Captain
So this is the exact problem I foresaw in my last post, and that's why I asked that we just discuss the standard "potential" argument, because the explanation I gave is more of an advancement of that position. This does not pose any challenge to my moral system.
The tl;dr answer (if you don't want to do it that way), is that if JP knew this for sure, and believes that if the situation was reversed, he himself would have no right to life as the doomed child, them I don't see any moral problem with JP's actions. The fact is, the information available to one does matter in one's moral considerations: it is what makes the difference between an act of ignorance or malice. Me giving money to a child in Africa might cause a butterfly effect* that does bad shit, but that doesn't factor into my moral considerations.
So your ethics have changed then, and we're now concerned with intentions (did JP have the intention to harm a morally considerable being). And this seems like an odd, foot in both camps, sort of ethics. The thing that makes the child considerable is that in the future they're going to become an adult, but the thing makes you right or wrong for torturing a kid is your belief in wether or not they're going to become an adult. Actually it seems like moral considerability in fact has nothing to do with moral action.
You're also condoning the torture of children who won't live to be a certain age which, uhh, well that's a pretty distasteful conclusion and I'm not sure you really believe it.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
LJ, finny, this thread is in a topical forum. Please keep it on topic.
Originally posted by Captain
I believe valid and generalisable frameworks of morality can be derived from ideas like social contracts and Kant's categorical imperative.
Animals that have no ability to respect any laws or agreements or social contracts, deserve no moral consideration.
Certain animals have some ability to respect certain agreements or some subsets of a typical human social contract. For example: dogs; cats; certain birds; certain marine life such as octopodes, dolphins, orcas; pigs; horses. These animals deserve an elevated but still subhuman level of moral consideration.
Human children below a certain age aren't able to observe laws or respect a social contract either. Do you think they're also excluded from moral consideration as well?
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Originally posted by xox_LJ_xox
^^^^ opening post…..
WHAT?
Should I have posted…..”I had a filet tonight to energize my body, threrefore; I support the holocaust of animals!”?
Come on now. SMH
Posting what you had for dinner isn't really a discussion of the ethics of eating meat, but you'll notice that wasn't what I deleted. It was half page of penis jokes and non sequitur posts.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Great, thank you for making this thread in the right forum. It's fine to post however you like as long as it isn't getting in the way of someone else trying to have a conversation, as in the other thread.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Originally posted by ohfralala
I thought this was a random thought thread, thoughts that may not even be of interest to anyone.
Why did my comment get deleted but rewatching X-files and getting off work in 15 minutes didn’t?
Make a serious thoughts to be taken seriously and please don’t comment unless you are serious thread instead.
Because I had to scroll through four pages of gay rape spam and random non-sequiturs and there are better ways to spend a sunday afternoon, so there may well be examples of inane shitposting I missed. This does not give license to derail a thread.
I haven't banned anyone, I'm just reminding everyone that threads in the topical forums should keep to the topic established in the opening post.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
holy shit, I had to delete like half the thread because it was literally incoherent shitposting in a topical thread. This is not acceptable. If you don't have a serious on topic response to the subject then don't post in this thread.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
