Man stabs people at gay pride march in Jerusalem for second time

[Holliday]

Violence can never be justified by reason.

Don't be ridiculous. When dealing with other human beings, the lowest form of communication should set the tone for all further forms of communication. Ignore this at your own peril.

When faced with aggression (initial violence), the only reasonable response is self-defense (which can, and in some cases must, include reactionary violence).

If someone breaks into your home (aggression) and is in the process of raping your wife (aggression), the only reasonable response is to extinguish the threat (self-defense). By ignoring your rights (social construct), the aggressor has no room for complaint when you ignore his. In fact, you are doing society a favor by removing someone who is incapable of respecting the rights of others. What would be unreasonable would be trying to employ higher forms of communication (bargaining for example) in an attempt to resolve this unfortunate situation. Not only would it be quite likely that your entire family ends up dead, but other families may suffer the same fate in the future. In some cases, violence is the only reasonable response to a prior act of violence (aggression).

None of the above has anything to do with this thread (or the religion discussion). I simply saw a ridiculous statement (which is not a surprise considering the source) and felt the need to opine on it. I'm not sure whether he is confusing violence with aggression or is such a pacifist that he is unwilling to use the tools (including violence as a last resort) necessary to protect himself and others.

[1714181424]

1714181424

[1714181424]

1714181424

[Falconer]

@Falconer, MakingMoneyHoney

Maybe it was a provocation. Maybe they were trying to goad religious people and trying to frustrate them. Maybe they had other reasons to choose Jerusalem. But you missed the point. None of those things give anyone the right to use violence against them. Depending on where you live religious people can be so very annoying and get away with a lot of stuff they shouldn't. But I wouldn't support killing or attacking them no matter how annoying they are. There is no justification for this attack.

I like your wise words, but sometime people have limited patience for themselves. We as religion people respect them, but why they cant do like us. Atleast they should know how to make a parade properly in the appropriate place for them.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

You're still causing harm to the body.

Again, there is no "the body", there is only self. This is vital to understanding the reality of self without superstition - without soul.  

It only makes sense to refer to oneself as "the body" if you're a head in a jar looking across the room at your headless body.

You are fetishizing life and demonizing death, this is an immature perspective. Life and death are yin and yang.

You are so sad that a transgender or homosexual may kill themselves, yet you advise people to kill themselves if they are hurting enough that they feel they can't take it anymore. You believe they should kill themselves because they're hurting, that it would be helpful to them.

I've already shown this. You think that if they are hurting this bad they should kill themselves. You hate that I'm writing this, because you don't want them to kill themselves. You got a case of cognitive dissonance. That's because you're a hypocrite.

[Beliathon]

You got a case of cognitive dissonance.

Wrong, I was raised Christian. Resolving one's own cognitive dissonance is how one goes from being a theist to an atheist. In essence this is the first trick every former-theist learns.

If someone breaks into your home (aggression) and is in the process of raping your wife (aggression), the only reasonable response is to extinguish the threat (self-defense).

"Extinguish the threat" sounds a lot like a sociopath's euphemism for murder. I sure hope I'm wrong, but here you have revealed the waiting violence all capitalists hide in their hearts. So two wrongs make a right?

or is such a pacifist that he is unwilling to use the tools (including violence as a last resort) necessary to protect himself and others.

On the contrary my friend. I loathe violence but I wouldn't hesitate to use it to protect myself or my loved ones. But when the revolution comes I'll do everything in my power to prevent the senseless massacre of the elite capitalists I hate so much.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

You got a case of cognitive dissonance.

Wrong, I was raised Christian. Resolving one's own cognitive dissonance is how one goes from being a theist to an atheist. In essence this is the first trick every former-theist learns.

Oh, so you do think transgenders and homosexuals who are troubled by teasing too much should kill themselves?

Edit: You completely ignored this question.... guess that proves it. You have some cognitive dissonance, because you don't want them to kill themselves, and you do think they should, and have intellectualized to somehow believe that it's not harmful (violence) to them when they do it.

[Holliday]

If someone breaks into your home (aggression) and is in the process of raping your wife (aggression), the only reasonable response is to extinguish the threat (self-defense).

"Extinguish the threat" sounds a lot like a sociopath's euphemism for murder. I sure hope I'm wrong, but here you have revealed the waiting violence all capitalists hide in their hearts. So two wrongs make a right?

I wouldn't know what a sociopath's euphemism for murder is, but I'm pretty sure that the example I provided is about as far from murder as you can get while still ending a life. I don't really know what private ownership of the means of production has to do with our conversation about violence, and I find it pretty hilarious that you've tried to fit it in here. I don't visit youtube, sorry. Two wrongs do not make a right. There is nothing wrong with self-defense. As I said, as soon as someone has shown that they refuse to acknowledge the rights of others, they have no room for complaint when others ignore their rights. That's only reasonable.

I loathe violence but I wouldn't hesitate to use it to protect myself or my loved ones.

Violence is simply the result of using extreme force. It's kind of concerning that you have such strong feelings about it. Do you loathe how a chainsaw rips apart a tree or how an internal combustion engine produces power because both are extremely violent.

But when the revolution comes I'll do everything in my power to prevent the senseless massacre of the elite capitalists I hate so much.

I'm laughing my ass off at you for bringing capitalism into this conversation a second time. Also, why so much hate? Which elite capitalists were you talking about, by the way. I hope you aren't talking about the US, because I don't think there are any functioning capitalists there (it's almost impossible to actually own anything in the US).

[ridery99]

Clear false flag attack by the sodomite community

[TECSHARE]

I exploit no one as I have no employees. My survival instinct does not overwhelm my sense of ethical decency.

You are the biggest hypocrite I have ever seen. The simple fact that you own products mean people were exploited for you to have them. Thousands of Chinese probably labored for months in sweatshops within their Communist nation in order for you to have what you have, but Capitalism is bad, Socialism is good, you are above it all and don't exploit anyone right?

Be true to your ideals. Move to a truly socialist nation like Venezuela where people clearly aren't exploited.

[Beliathon]

The simple fact that you own products mean people were exploited for you to have them.

You're right, I should stop eating and drinking water so I can be totally certain I'm not indirectly exploiting anyone.  
You're a real class act, using my personal disclosure as an avenue for an ad hominem attack.

Although I directly exploit no one as I have no employees, I'm well-aware of the indirect exploitation happening constantly on my (and your) behalf.

Part 1 - Conversations with Great Minds - Dr. Richard Wolff - America's taboo subject

Part 2 - Alternatives to Capitalism

Move to a truly socialist nation like Venezuela where people clearly aren't exploited.

This is you. I'm not going anywhere pal. But capitalism is going to Asia and leaving our sorry american asses behind to rot. I'm sure you'll feel differently about it eventually, as our cities continue tearing themselves apart in poverty and renewed racial tension.

[TECSHARE]

The simple fact that you own products mean people were exploited for you to have them.

You're right, I should stop eating and drinking water so I can be totally certain I'm not indirectly exploiting anyone.  

Although I directly exploit no one as I have no employees, I'm well-aware of the indirect exploitation happening constantly on my (and your) behalf.

Part 1 - Conversations with Great Minds - Dr. Richard Wolff - America's taboo subject

Part 2 - Alternatives to Capitalism

Move to a truly socialist nation like Venezuela where people clearly aren't exploited.

This is you. I'm not going anywhere pal. But capitalism is going to Asia and leaving your sorry american ass behind.

There you go again, going right to the most extremist position you can think of and attributing it to your opponent. Where did I say stop eating and drinking? Do you NEED that computer you are jibbering away on right now? Do you need that smartphone you have? Do you own a car? A lot of people had to suffer for you to enjoy the capitalist right of ownership of those items you clearly don't NEED in a survivalist sense (like food and water).

Just because you don't have employees doesn't mean you don't exploit people. In fact I am sure some people in the local area would LOVE a job, but you would rather keep it all for yourself rather than observe the socialist tenets of sharing your property with everyone wouldn't you?

BTW, I suggested you move to Venezuela so you can be with your socialist brethren and live a lifestyle true to your socialist dogmas so you don't have to suffer living along side the dirty exploitative capitalists of America. You feel free to be a hypocrite right where you are though. Asia is turning capitalist, very fast. Could it be because socialism is a failed ideology? Nah... couldn't be...

[Holliday]

Capitalism is a system of resource distribution which actively prevents equilibrium. All systems approach equilibrium unless prevented from doing so by a constantly applied external force. In capitalism, that force is systematic hierarchical violence.

Civilization is based on a clearly defined and widely accepted yet often unarticulated hierarchy. Violence done by those higher on the hierarchy to those lower is nearly always invisible, that is, unnoticed. When it is noticed, it is fully rationalized.
Violence done by those lower on the hierarchy to those higher is unthinkable, and when it does occur is regarded with shock, horror, and the fetishization of the victims. Our way of living—industrial civilization—is based on, requires, and would collapse very quickly without persistent and widespread violence.

The property of those higher on the hierarchy is more valuable than the lives of those below. It is acceptable for those above to increase the amount of property they control—in everyday language, to make money—by destroying or taking the lives of those below. This is called production.
If those below damage the property of those above, those above may kill or otherwise destroy the lives of those below. This is called justice.

Within this culture, economics—not community well-being, not morals, not ethics, not justice, not life itself—drives social decisions. Social decisions are determined primarily (and often exclusively) on the basis of whether these decisions will increase the monetary fortunes of the decision-makers and those they serve.
Stated another way -  Social decisions are founded primarily (and often exclusively) on the almost entirely unexamined belief that the decision-makers and those they serve are entitled to magnify their power and/or financial fortunes at the expense of all those beneath them in the hierarchy.

What you've described here is most certainly not capitalism (which I've been trying to explain to you for a long time now). It looks like corporatism (fascism) to me.

Also, since you clearly talk about a form of government in the above (even if you don't directly say it), I'm going to let you in on a little secret. The people get the government they deserve.

When I was younger, I hated a lot of things. It took me a long time to realize that hate is not only a waste of time, there is no reason for it. I think you and I are more like-minded that I care to admit, but I think you let your anger blind you about certain thing and this prevents you from coming to certain realizations.

[Beliathon]

What you've described here is most certainly not capitalism (which I've been trying to explain to you for a long time now). It looks like corporatism (fascism) to me.

Apparently I need to make explicit the distinction between actually-existing capitalism, which you feel the need to call "corporatism", and the utopian fantasy capitalism which exists only in your imagination.

[Holliday]

What you've described here is most certainly not capitalism (which I've been trying to explain to you for a long time now). It looks like corporatism (fascism) to me.

Apparently I need to make explicit the distinction between actually-existing capitalism, which you feel the need to call "corporatism", and the utopian fantasy capitalism which exists only in your imagination.

I feel the need to call it corporatism because that's what it is. You are telling me you hate horses and showing me pictures of a cow. How are we supposed to have a discussion if we don't distinguish the things we are talking about? Semantics matter.

[Beliathon]

This has gotten off-topic, @Holliday if you want to continue the conversation about capitalism's concealed violence, PM me.