by Secret Agent SmileyThe point of my post was to provoke thought. I never offered my opinion on good vs evil ;)
I know and I still want an answer to my question. If you can't answer it, maybe somebody else can.
by Thrill Kill
by Spatial MindHa ha ha.
Dear Thrill. You know I'm always quick to give up debating with you for a good reason.
This is the first time you and I have ever come close to debating anything.
We see things very differently. Debating would be pointless anyway.
We touched the Dr. Phill accusing Emmy subject, you were soloing a group, I was the first to strike, and we've touched something that had to do with the existence of Love. On the most part we go two rounds.
You see this as a first cause it's the first time you came after me for something I said.
"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law;
Love is the Law, Love under Will."
-Aleister Crowley, known in his time as "the wickedest man in the world."
He believed that in an ideal world, knowing one's true will would never contradict with the true will of another, so imposition of will wouldn't exist.
It's a very idealistic thought.
And in reply to something specific in your previous post, what is "obviously best" is not obvious to all. Mixing that with Thrill's post, Herr Hitler was trying to correct the injustices done to Germany in the Treaty of Versailles as well as trying to cleanse the world of "evil" people who were, in his mind, not contributing to the greater good.
From what I understand, he gained quite a bit of legitimate support.
Laws tell us that certain actions have consequences (if we get caught). Therefore, I see no reason (beyond understanding the laws of society) to place moral judgement on my actions. With that said though, I do judge the actions of others if they affect me and will retaliate if I see a reason to.