Wtf

#51
#51
Spartacavolus said:
Ha. Not hurt. Just funny to see guys who are arrogant about supposed intelligence, but have the common sense of an invalid.
Betty is kindof crusty. My neighbors dog died though. Maybe I can go tear that up for a couple minutes. That's cool, right.
Click to expand...

I think you are mixing morality and criminality.
 
#52
#52
n_huffhines said:
K, I agree. I wouldn't stop someone either. Where we differ is I don't think it's the same thing as having sex with a doll. Not even close. They are both inanimate, but what each represents is fundamentally different.
Click to expand...

Yep. This is what is tripping everyone up.
 
#58
#58
T-TownVol said:
welcome to "we read philosophy and it has screwed up our common sense" thread.....compliments of trut and pkt
Click to expand...

So common sense dictates that there should be a law against this sort of thing? I can see it from both sides.

Why does there need to be a law prohibiting this? It harms no one, it just has the potential to offend (and it offends me). Why do we think we should ban stuff that offends us?
 
#60
#60
T-TownVol said:
welcome to "we read philosophy and it has screwed up our common sense" thread.....compliments of trut and pkt
Click to expand...

I'm trying to understand but I just can't. So if eating oysters is like having sex with dead bodies (deriving pleasure from "inanimate" objects) then I guess I should find pleasure in eating rubber bands because I use a rubber object for sex?

Is this about right?
 
#62
#62
Georgia Peach said:
I'm trying to understand but I just can't. So if eating oysters is like having sex with dead bodies (deriving pleasure from "inanimate" objects) then I guess I should find pleasure in eating rubber bands because I use a rubber object for sex?

Is this about right?
Click to expand...

No: reread and work through the logic (modus ponens).
 
#63
#63
Georgia Peach said:
I'm trying to understand but I just can't. So if eating oysters is like having sex with dead bodies (deriving pleasure from "inanimate" objects) then I guess I should find pleasure in eating rubber bands because I use a rubber object for sex?

Is this about right?
Click to expand...

By golley....I think you've GOT IT!
 
#65
#65
n_huffhines said:
So common sense dictates that there should be a law against this sort of thing? I can see it from both sides.

Why does there need to be a law prohibiting this? It harms no one, it just has the potential to offend (and it offends me). Why do we think we should ban stuff that offends us?
Click to expand...

That is my point, common sense should tell any one, that does not over think this, that it should not be done.
 
#66
#66
T-TownVol said:
I did not say it violated anyones rights.
Click to expand...

Anyone who places any notion of "common sense" above their own reasoning has mindlessly acquiesced, and given their individual gift of reason over to the commons. That is what common sense is; using common sense to make decisions is acquiescing to the authority of some ambiguous social body. Do you really want to esteem common sense? Or, do you want to think and use reason to explore the very roots and foundations of your opinions?

You are right to distinguish philosophy and common sense, though; however, in esteeming common sense, you devalue your own ability to reason.
 
#69
#69
therealUT said:
Anyone who places any notion of "common sense" above their own reasoning has mindlessly acquiesced, and given their individual gift of reason over to the commons. That is what common sense is; using common sense to make decisions is acquiescing to the authority of some ambiguous social body. Do you really want to esteem common sense? Or, do you want to think and use reason to explore the very roots and foundations of your opinions?

You are right to distinguish philosophy and common sense, though; however, in esteeming common sense, you devalue your own ability to reason.
Click to expand...

dang......there are some serious points in this shat.....YOU WIN
 
#70
#70
T-Town you can't aurgue with a guy who thinks there is nothing wrong with didling a little boy as long as the kid said yes..... Kinda like fighting with a fence post.
 
#71
#71
hog88 said:
T-Town you can't aurgue with a guy who thinks there is nothing wrong with didling a little boy as long as the kid said yes..... Kinda like fighting with a fence post.
Click to expand...

I truly think he is compensating for some thing with all the name dropping he does. But, if it makes him feel smart, who are we to judge.
 
Last edited:
#73
#73
PKT_VOL said:
Not some random person. If grandpa wants to, then that is his business. You could definitely argue about it being very disrespectful to grandma, but that is, in my opinion, family business; not public business and certainly not a criminal offense.
Click to expand...

It's an inanimate object. Marriage void and grandpa by no means owns grandma. You aren't being very consistent.
 
#74
#74
041912.jpg
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top