• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Women charged with throwing 4 puppies, killing 2

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I'm agreeing with people who kill to survive, survival of the fittest and all that, if the choice is starve or kill an animal, then go for it. If you are doing it because it's fun and to mount it on the wall. Then no.

Gang bangers claim they kill to survive. I mean, if a crypt doesn't kill a blood, the blood will most certainly kill the crypt, no? Survival of the fittest right, go for it?
 
Gang bangers claim they kill to survive. I mean, if a crypt doesn't kill a blood, the blood will most certainly kill the crypt, no? Survival of the fittest right, go for it?

Obviously not, that's deluded. There are examples of killing to survive, this is not one of them.
 
Obviously not, that's deluded. There are examples of killing to survive, this is not one of them.

Why not? If they don't kill the other guy, they'll be killed. I am just using your expression of self defense and applying it to a very specific set of individuals. Since it fits the survival of the fittest, you would approve of the action, no?
 
Nope, just based on logic.

But your logic is formed from your ignorance.

As long as you eat meat(which you already admitted) you are on the same moral level as any hunter who eats their kill. You just conveniently ignore the means by which your food was sourced.
 
But your logic is formed from your ignorance.

As long as you eat meat(which you already admitted) you are on the same moral level as any hunter who eats their kill. You just conveniently ignore the means by which your food was sourced.

I know I'm doing something wrong, that is the difference.
 
I know I'm doing something wrong, that is the difference.

Yes, your stance is worse. You think you are doing something wrong but continue to do it. Lots of self hate there I would imagine. How do you wake up in the morning and face the day knowing you are doing such morally reprehensible things?
 
Yes, your stance is worse. You think you are doing something wrong but continue to do it. Lots of self hate there I would imagine. How do you wake up in the morning and face the day knowing you are doing such morally reprehensible things?

Everyone does morally reprehensible things, I'm OK with that knowledge.

Knowing you're doing something wrong and still doing it? Guess you could say hunters feel the same way... does that make it okay then?

Wait what?

Doing something wrong is always wrong whether you think it's wrong or not, having fun doing something wrong and thinking it's OK is psychotic.
 
Nope, everyone does not do morally reprehensible things. Quit trying to justify your own failings with the "other people are doing it". Quit lying to your self.

OK, then let me rephrase, I do morally reprehensible things, this is one of them, I am not always a good person.
 
I imagine ATOT will be fine with this. As long as she ate them afterwards.


I imagine you'll be fine with it so long as after she threw them agaist the wall she cut the meat out of them and packaged it up so people like you can simply go to the store and buy your dead animal.
 
Back
Top