Please respect other members. Please do not post links or information about hacking/warez/cheats.
Read the rules of these forums as we rarely warn before banning. Lost or need RSS check the forum map.
here's a thought that came to me one day while working my boring job
probably had something to do with news media, police dramas, and the jamming of religion down peoples throats
sometimes murder is justified in the legal system
example:
woman A kills her husband because he's rich, she wants his money, and she wants to be able to spend her money and screw other guys
woman B kills her husband because he's abusive to her and her children
now, in a moral sense, the court system, or the jury, would be more likely to punish woman A more harshly, because her motive was greed, and be easier, if any punishment at all, on woman B, because she was doing it out of fear and to protect her children
this gives some moral justification to murder, even though both should be equally wrong, murder is murder
now, i think they need to take religion into consideration in a murder
person A is religious, believes in an afterlife, thus, even when they die, they have more to look forward to. in fact, in some cases, murder is a free pass into heaven, since you were done wrong. in other cases, some say murder traps the soul on earth. who knows.
person B is not religious and doesn't believe in an afterlife, they believe life is what you make it while alive, therefore, life is much more precious.
so in this case, i would argue that it's less wrong, or less morally objectionable, to murder someone who is religious, since they believe in an afterlife or reincarnation, another chance.
so murder against someone who does not believe in religion, someone who's only chance at life was taken away, deserves a much harsher punishment.
so that is my opinion, murdering a religious person should be weighed as less morally objectionable and be given a lighter sentence, if they continue to give exceptions such as the abused woman scenario.
person B is not religious and doesn't believe in an afterlife, they believe life is what you make it while alive, therefore, life is much more precious.
A life of faith is not simply ordered to "the afterlife", but life "right now". In addition, I can't see what's precious about ignoring reality and going along with what one's own imagination offers.
What if they think they are going to hell? Eternal nothingness is probably better than eternal torture.
Eternal nothingness is hell... But I see what you're saying. It can be argued however that ceasing to be completely is impossible. I can elaborate more tommorow or something - I gotta run.
Eternal nothingness is hell... But I see what you're saying. It can be argued however that ceasing to be completely is impossible. I can elaborate more tommorow or something - I gotta run.
Well that may be what you believe, but there are plenty of people that hell is full of maggots and fire.
Well that may be what you believe, but there are plenty of people that hell is full of maggots and fire.
I would think that the "fire" and tortures of hell (for indeed they are tortures), are symbolic of the fire in one's being that takes place after being separated for eternity from that which we seek - union with God. It doesnt stand to reason that an elemental aspect like fire (or maggots) could dwell outside time and space, so I'd say that the torture would be one of being - which I'd say would be infintely worse. That's just my take on it, based on metaphysics.
I would think that the "fire" and tortures of hell (for indeed they are tortures), are symbolic of the fire in one's being that takes place after being separated for eternity from that which we seek - union with God. It doesnt stand to reason that an elemental aspect like fire (or maggots) could dwell outside time and space, so I'd say that the torture would be one of being - which I'd say would be infintely worse. That's just my take on it, based on metaphysics.
It also doesn't stand to reason that being exists outside of time and space. What other kind of being would there be?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AgeOfAbnegation
It can be argued however that ceasing to be completely is impossible.
An individual ceasing to be? Please tell me the argument.
It also doesn't stand to reason that being exists outside of time and space. What other kind of being would there be?
An individual ceasing to be? Please tell me the argument.
I agree. If one ceases to exist, then that's it - no pain - no suffering - no desires or needs. There's simply nothing - how is this hell?
On the other hand even the Biblical verson of hell doesn't make sense. You're dead so how is fire and brimstone supposed to hurt you? Does sensory perception, including pain, continue after death? Wouldn't a person get used to pain eventually? As bad a fire is, after a while the mind becomes desensitized to anything.
If heaven is to merge or become one with God - what happens to you the individual? Is it destroyed? What is eternity like being in heaven? Is it one big eternal Bible camp? Is it akin to a morphine-induced stupor? What exactly do people who believe they will spend eternity with God expect that eternity to be like and why?
Linear Mode
