Sociopath Community

DaddysGirl stated: source post

No, it isn't You bypassed the inherent intent of morality which is apparently understood at some "higher" level. Which is where the argument tends to fall apart on a constant basis.

Untrue. I mentioned by default we already know the difference between morality and immorality. I now assume even you know the difference, it's just you want to debate it's existence ? or what's your point ?

So...

What then is the intent of the concept of morality?

To progress and prosper. Morality allows the continuation of us. I wouldn't say it's conceptual, but if that's the most people can make of it, then it would do them good to embrace it.   

No, it isn't You bypassed the inherent intent of morality which is apparently understood at some "higher" level. Which is where the argument tends to fall apart on a constant basis.

So...

What then is the intent of the concept of morality?

On a site that took issue with CP being spammed, it's no surprise how a suspected pedophile like yourself will spiral inward when the subject of morality comes into play.

Not at all. Rather the question is one of your tolerance and acceptance for that which is perceived as immoral...or is it? Do you consider pedophilia to be a progressive convenience?

Could be or not. But you side stepped the following questions.

So....that could suggest other than what you appear to be implying. 

When introducing debbils and demons into discussions of morality, all anyone is doing is removing responsibility for the actions of the perpetrator.

Going back to the issue of gold, yes there are physical and non physical values.

In physical terms gold is 'pretty' but the same could be said for silver, opals, diamonds, etc.

But its value is symbolic in non physical terms, in the kabbalah different planets are represented by metals and these could be applied in occult workings and these things most likely set the physical values.

eg.

Sun = gold

Moon = silver

Saturn = lead

....and so on

Spatial Mind stated: source post

 

Yeah. I can feel you dragging me down to that place where you are with those questions. Trust me, I feel your pain.

No pain involved. Simply questions, which you are side stepping...very NPD of you.

 

Fortunately there's no importance in your best guess.

Not to you. But it might implicate, and that is your problem ,not mine.

I've done no such thing. I never even mentioned morality except to answer your derailed questions, what I wrote about is secular and non secular perspectives on why Gold holds any value. On that note, an atheist doesn't really know why Gold has any value, to them we just made it so.

Evil and the question of, is that not based on the actions and their contradiction to accepted and/ or perceived morality? Which you redefined for your purpose and which is widely different from the understood meaning, commonly in use.

And finally, on the subject of demons, they have people when people glorify them, or, when the person makes themselves eligible for legal takeover. The beholder is always at fault. 

lol That is the worst attempt at gaslighting I have come across in quite a while.

DaddysGirl stated: source post

No pain involved. Simply questions, which you are side stepping...very NPD of you.

Obviously there is pain. You are a pedophile squirming in a thread about evil and morality. Your questions are indeed simple, but your level of intelligence is making me ill. I'd rather deal with Daniella. You've also yet to answer any of my questions, which is why I cut off your supply of answers, and soon will cut you off, and everyone similar to you.

Not to you. But it might implicate, and that is your problem ,not mine.

Oh it might. Well, good luck with the smoke and mirrors thing you have going for you there.

Evil and the question of, is that not based on the actions and their contradiction to accepted and/ or perceived morality? Which you redefined for your purpose and which is widely different from the understood meaning, commonly in use.

Again. My post was about Gold, and 2 perspectives as to why it has any value. See you cannot give out any reason as to why gold has any value, not without repeating what I wrote, in the secular, and non secular sense.

As for you bringing up Evil to me. Don't use question marks, it makes you look confused, and your grammar indicates how you're over thinking for the sake of winning debate for sport above higher knowing.

As usual, I'll discard all of what you wrote, and simply say, "Evil is based on malicious intent" and not on some blind bullshit such as your....example ? question ?

In order for evil to be evil, it has to be of the will. There are evil people in this world, pedophile, and they are as spiteful as someone you know.

lol That is the worst attempt at gaslighting I have come across in quite a while.

 

Oh yes, I'm obviously trying to gaslight you. For my next trick, I will stonewall you and everyone like you.

Have your final say. It can be anything you want, and you can make it even uglier. I promise I will read it.

Thank you for your attention.

DaddysGirl stated: source post

Could be or not. But you side stepped the following questions.

Yeah. I can feel you dragging me down to that place where you are with those questions. Trust me, I feel your pain.

So....that could suggest other than what you appear to be implying. 

Fortunately there's no importance in your best guess.

When introducing debbils and demons into discussions of morality, all anyone is doing is removing responsibility for the actions of the perpetrator.

I've done no such thing. I never even mentioned morality except to answer your derailed questions, what I wrote about is secular and non secular perspectives on why Gold holds any value. On that note, an atheist doesn't really know why Gold has any value, to them we just made it so.

And finally, on the subject of demons, they have people when people glorify them, or, when the person makes themselves eligible for legal takeover. The beholder is always at fault. 

Inquirer stated: source post

 

leon14 stated: source post

Lets see....... poofter marriage, trannies becoming mainstream, abolishment of the death penalty, negotiation with terrorists, priorities of right and wrong being decided by celebrities and the twitterati, leniant sentences for pedos, etc.

Alright, let me rephrase: You need to explain and show why moral relativism is hurtful when it comes to commonly accepted morals. Using gay marriage as an example is pointless unless you can explain why 'we' should consider that to be bad.

 

You should consider it bad because ones morals can be bought.

Moral relativism means that there are no absolutes.

An example of this is the likes of the BBC ignoring the likes of Jimmy Savile even though they knew exactly what he was doing.

TheFool 0 stated: source post

Is it not more interesting to consider how evil can be good and good, evil.

That's nothing new. Dove tails into the Fairy Tales and moral relativism

Evil can spark change and growth, good often enables a current mindset and therefore holds a person back.

Evil or Good is based on the perspective of the affected and possibly observers and further confined to Fairy Tales. So which Fairy Tale are you going to run with until you run into yourself?

Without destruction there cannot be creation!

Silly statement, neither exists without the other.