Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
Description
No description provided.
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
No description provided.
Final thoughts:
Economic considerations and religion? Where did I talk about either of those?
I still don’t approve of the changelings and their tactics. Much like terrorists, they attacked the ponies, who were not trying to harm them. They also kidnapped, deceived and fed off of them. That’s wrong, am I correct?
You still haven’t answered my question about why you’re reluctant to protect me… I’m legitimately curious.
You’re right in saying that we won’t change the other person’s opinion, so yeah, let’s agree to disagree.
There’s quite a difference between economic considerations and religion, for starters. Moving on.
So, then, you’d understand precisely how the changelings felt when their options were to acquire territory and a source of sustenance, or to die. That meant going to war (a badly-executed war, mind you, but still one). Innocent nymphs would starve to death otherwise, after all. Note how I’m still trying to make this relevant to the original point and you’re the one campaigning?
Because apparently diversity of opinions, a freedom we’re protecting, is a bit underappreciated. Now that we’ve both agreed on a point or two, and won’t convince the other of a damn thing, let’s go and wrap this up.
I think it’s hypocritical so say that you can’t judge someone for what they believe, and then say you can’t stand Commies. Actually, I don’t approve of Communism, either, but that’s not the point.
I would rather die with morals intact than be evil, but if we don’t go to war against terrorists, they’ll blow up innocent Americans and rape innocent woman. Now is that right? Do you think that going to war is immoral? It seems not, judging by how you say you’re in the DHS and you’d fight back. Let’s differentiate between personally murdering a person and going to war.
As for latching onto race, I guess I’m just really tired of being told I should feel guilty for happening to be white, which I can’t help. The people who go for multiculturalism are usually the same people who tells whites they should be ashamed of themselves for the color of their skin. If you’re not saying that, okay. Point conceded.
…You sound reluctant about protecting me. Do you mind telling me why?
And yet I wasn’t trying to make you feel guilty, given that I was just pointing out hypocrisy, but I guess it did work. There might be hope there yet.
Regardless, if you have no option, it’s frequently classified as kill-or-be-killed, or in this case, “kill” (nonfatally)-or-die. Which you agree with, as stated there. (Although, didn’t you argue that if the result is the death of another human, wouldn’t it be better to “die with your morals intact”? I wouldn’t. I would fight back, and currently am, hence my job.) And that’s why there can’t be an objective right or wrong: because what’s good for you is always going to be bad for someone else. Take, as an example, a case where you build an orphan shelter. Yay! Lots of orphans get homes, which is good. Elsewhere, the losing contractor for use of that land goes into default on his mortgage and falls into alcoholism.
You were indeed the first one who leapt to the idea that I was latching onto race (“What are you gonna do next? Call me evil for being a white person?”), so I wonder where I got that idea, indeed.
But no, you’ll just blithely go on ahead no matter what anyone points out, so let’s. I’ll be here IRL to, sigh, protect you.
Actually, you did bring up slavery. Remember this?
@Lawful Girly
Also, I’m not saying we should kill everything we find repulsive. In the case of a non-human, non-sentient being, that might not be bad, but in the case of humans, it’s murder (which I think we can agree is wrong). I think that Miley Cyrus is repulsive, but I’m not about to go out and kill her. As for terrorists, they’re trying to MURDER human beings who don’t share their beliefs. As for the US, if we don’t act against them, they’ll murder us. Military action in our case would be self-defense.
You seem to be assuming that I’m attacking the enthnicity/race, not the belief. Perhaps you’re not understanding what I’m saying.
Now, I know that not everyone follows the culture they were brought up in, although most do, but those who are clearly behaving in accordance with their culture can be judged with that culture. If you reject your society’s culture, fine. You can be judged by whatever belief system you follow.
Now I think that there IS an objective right and wrong, whether humanity can figure out what it is or not. Why don’t we stand up for what we believe in, without compromising our morality for the sake of political correctness, and see what the future holds in store for people of our respective belief systems?
Bzzt. Communism is a philosophy, not an ethnicity, nor is it a religion, nor a culture, nor a gender. The “Nuh-uh! You are!” technique, while undoubtedly effective against five-year-olds, does not really apply in serious political discussion. Anyhow.
It’s not up to us to change any aspects of culture, though, whether they have positive or negative effects, nor does the environment in which one was raised necessarily dictate an individual’s interpretation of cultural morality. You were saying that the entire culture, meaning every person in it, is worth less than someone with a different culture. Mm, what was that unbiased website saying again?
Welp, not surprising if she loves everything equally.
So, you’re okay with killing things because they are repulsive to you, then? Sounds familiar.
Hey, you notice how I never brought up Obama, nor slavery? Funny how those always seem to come right up on the defensive. I don’t feel any guilt, personally, either, but the fact that you even mention it all suggests something… (Note! Yes, voting for someone just because of his race, or say, giving him a Nobel Peace Prize, is biased. Not good.)
You just said you can’t stand Commies. Now, a lot of people would call YOU a bigot for that.
Also, it isn’t innate characteristics that I’m objecting to, like skin color, eye color, ethnicity in general… It’s the belief system. If you want to know how women are treated in Islam, by the way, here’s a link to an article quoting verses from the Quran: http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/women-worth-less.aspx
I object to a culture that treats women that way, and they do treat women that way. Google articles about Syrian refugees RAPING WOMEN in the countries they’ve been sent to. Their culture teaches that rape is okay, and I find that NOT OKAY.
As for Fluttershy, are you going to call the Element of Kindness a fish-murderer? The sapiency of fish in the pony universe hasn’t been established. That one’s debatable.
Also, I don’t want leeches in my gut and I have no problem with killing them. Yuck.
For another thing, I am not a white supremacist. I think that favoring whites is racist, but so is favoring blacks, like voting for Obama just because he’s black, or favoring anyone because they’re black. Disliking a race purely on the basis of skin color is racist, too. Hating blacks for being black is racist, but so is hating whites for being white. It’s the culture that counts, not the skin color. If we truly weren’t racist, we’d be totally color-blind (metaphorically speaking). It wouldn’t matter if we were black, white, brown, yellow, red, or purple polka-dotted. Our society hasn’t reached that point yet, which is a moral deficiency.
How about this? I’ll tolerate any Muslim who isn’t actively trying to blow me up and you tolerate any white person who isn’t actively enslaving people or stealing from them. Slavery is dead, by the way. Don’t blame me for what my ancestor might have done.
Okay, me? A liberal? Ha! Clearly, you don’t know me. Those commies, I can’t stand. That is immoral, because getting between someone and their freedom to do what they want with their stuff is in no way, shape, or form, beneficial to whoever doesn’t have the power. But yeah, disliking someone because of their innate characteristics is, again, literally textbook definition of bigotry. Also, kind of against the message of the show. Those fish are sapient, incidentally, it would seem…and Fluttershy feeds them to other sapient beings. Also, if parasitism is your hangup, shouldn’t you be out genociding leeches and the bacteria in your own gut?
Yes, it is racist to favor one race over another, white, brown, or green. The fact that someone (like white people) is a victim of racism does not make it okay to use it yourself. You can object to individual parts of it. Blind hatred is not only–yes!–morally wrong, it’s dangerous, as it leaves you only seeing what you expect to see and missing anyone who differs from the expected culture, but could still be a threat.
And you know what I do for a living? DHS. So I think I know what I’m talking about.
Are you a vegetarian? Eating the meat of animals does not bother me. Mind-controlling ponies and manipulating them does, though, and as for the changelings, kidnapping ponies, pretending to be them, and deceiving their friends and relatives in order to feed off of them like a parasite definitely bothers me.
Ah, and I see that you’re a liberal who has run out of arguments, because you have called me a bigot.
I’m not against the ENTIRE culture, but I do object to parts of it that I find morally wrong. While no culture is perfect, one with more justice than the others is generally better. Am I allowed to say that American culture is better than Muslim culture because we treat women better? No, you’d say I’m Islamophobic. Never mind that all the terrorists who are trying to kill us are Muslim (and hate our culture, by the way).
What you are going to do next, call me evil for being a white person? Personally, I find that very offensive and racist, but I’m not allowed to use the word racist, am I, because somehow being white makes me inherently racist. Now THAT’S racist.
Yet, calling one culture superior to others is bigotry. Which is bad. I guess it does make it easier to distance yourself from their human suffering, though, if it’s their fault.
While that’s true, keep in mind that this practice (as with many things that bother people about religions in general) was in fact formed out of a few people’s ideas and imposed on the culture in general, not an original concept. It was less that it was generally seen as moral and more that nobody could see how they would make a difference. Kind of like how servants would always be servants in England, for example.
But to get to the earlier point, no, sentient predators should not have to willingly go extinct because somebody says their very existence is evil. And I’d like to point this out to you:
The British doing horrifying things does not change the fact that it’s wrong to burn women alive, though.
There we go, saw that one coming. Let’s go make America great again, brother!
And while, yes, that’s quite a bad thing, the British don’t exactly have any room to talk, do they?
“Be it so, sahib. We also have a custom whereby we don’t cross the entire ocean, steal people’s lands, force them into slavery where we can’t outright murder them, force them to violate their religious tents while fighting for us otherwise (by using grease that’s blasphemous to them), and deny them the ability to make their own basic foodstuffs.”
Some morals are better than others, like some cultures are better than others.
In India, there used to be a custom called sati, where, if a woman’s husband died, the widow would be burned alive on her husband’s funeral pyre. The Indians said that it was their custom and it was morally acceptable. The British thought that burning women alive was clearly murder.
Wikipedia says:
General Sir Charles James Napier, the Commander-in-Chief in India from 1849 to 1851 is often noted for a story involving Hindu priests complaining to him about the prohibition of sati by British authorities.
“Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs.”
I was an absolutist, but then I sat down and really thought about it. Which said, there are lines I won’t cross, obviously.
@Wertyla
Precisely.
You’re a moral relativist, aren’t you? That means that you think all morals are just opinions and one system isn’t superior to any other.
… I don’t go for that. I’m sticking to my morals as well as I can.
Pretty easy to say now. Let me know if that ever holds up in a situation where you’re, say, trapped by a crashed plane in the Andes with some dead bodies (ever read Alive?).
Besides, morality can be viewed at from different POVs; what some consider repugnant morally (like eating beef to Indians) is perfectly normal to others. And that’s just in one species! Imagine the alien mindset of a siren.
Technically, if your choices are being incredibly evil or starving, starving is more moral, even if it isn’t easy. The motivation behind any evil action is self-benefit, right? Why sacrifice others to sustain yourself? We’re all going to die at some point anyway, and I’d rather die with integrity intact.
I meant, fit in with the school (she likes the activities). Further, no, it doesn’t have to. There have been examples of quite a few decent people within unpleasant larger organizations.
Yeah, though, I suppose it’s more moral to starve to death…
If you “fit in” with evil people, that makes you evil, too, and just because you have to do something to survive doesn’t make it moral. I’ve already had this argument with another person while discussing changelings.
Well, there’s also the fact that she’s the only one who actually seems to care about fitting in at all. And you can have villainous goals without actually being evil yourself–yeah, it’s a fine line.
Blinded by endearing air-headedness.
She’s more interested in tacos and punch than killing. I get that she likes making people do what she want, kind of has to as a survival instinct, but that came off as more of a spoiled and dimwitted but not terrible deep down girl. The others are way more evil than her.
Hehe yah. It’s like finding out that you have a stalker that thinks you enjoy eating people, when you don’t, and they want you to vore them.
The way I read that made it seem like this is the best way to summarize it.
Brony:“Give me that mouth.”
Sonata:“No.”
Brony:“GIVE ME THAT MOUTH!”
Sonata:“NO!”
Brony:“GIVE ME THAT MOUTH!”
Sonata:“NOOOOOOOOOO!!”
Brony:“GIVE! ME! THAT! MOUTH!”
Sonata:“NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!”