A
and2000x
Guest
How about judging someone by the context of the situation?
How about judging someone by the context of the situation?
Listen, I had the wrong impression. I had the idea that these sites were hoaxes and jokes because the website has more incorrect facts than high school science textbooks. Now that I know it's real...
Your facts may be incorrect, but I'm not slamming your ideals. I've never said once that I disagree with anything on the aformentioned website, and I was not calling it a hoax because I didn't like it. I was calling it a hoax because I was ill educated about said website. I assumed it was when I got to the mockHIM page, because of the silly inverted crosses and raunchy jokes. I took it as another "controversial" site designed to get hits by making waves.
Anus.com isn't my kind of site. However, Groin.com seems to have something there. I read through several of the articles posted there. This, however, is irrelevant.
Now back to the topic, how can you judge someone on the context of the situation? Do you mean the way that they react? Or are you judging on previous knowledge of the person combined with the current situation's context? Although, I personally don't believe there is any such thing as absolute social logic...
A
and2000x
Guest
I'm going to shoot for an example (this might not work since I'm so ill my head is spinning)
Person A does not like B, because B is selling tobacco to children. A contacts the government and complains. The government does nothing and ignores the situation. He tells other people who have tobacco smoking kids, but they just point fingers.
So A decides to place a bomb in the car of B. After work B goes to the car and is blown to bits. His factory shuts down and tobacco is no longer sold to children.
Person A is arrested for the crime and the court sentences him to death. The judgement was made that he was a depraved terrorist, despite the fact that the children were saved by his ballsy deeds.
The role of hero and villian are switched too often because absolute logic, when nothing is being judged in the context. Joseph Stalin was a bank robber who became the beloved leader and hero of the USSR. Today he is more or less damned as a mass murdering criminal, despite his great deeds. For the Christian, there are only absolute ways to judge someone, and pleasure or pain can only be administered by those claiming to do the will of Jesus. Just like Osama Bin Laden is pure EVIL because he crashed planes into buildings to take revenge on America.
Person A does not like B, because B is selling tobacco to children. A contacts the government and complains. The government does nothing and ignores the situation. He tells other people who have tobacco smoking kids, but they just point fingers.
So A decides to place a bomb in the car of B. After work B goes to the car and is blown to bits. His factory shuts down and tobacco is no longer sold to children.
Person A is arrested for the crime and the court sentences him to death. The judgement was made that he was a depraved terrorist, despite the fact that the children were saved by his ballsy deeds.
The role of hero and villian are switched too often because absolute logic, when nothing is being judged in the context. Joseph Stalin was a bank robber who became the beloved leader and hero of the USSR. Today he is more or less damned as a mass murdering criminal, despite his great deeds. For the Christian, there are only absolute ways to judge someone, and pleasure or pain can only be administered by those claiming to do the will of Jesus. Just like Osama Bin Laden is pure EVIL because he crashed planes into buildings to take revenge on America.
