Heaven or Hell? You be the judge!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-05-2016, 04:58 PM
RE: Heaven or Hell? You be the judge!
(25-05-2016 12:51 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  
(25-05-2016 09:56 AM)Alla Wrote:  if I understood you correctly you would rob Mercy.
why?

Because mercy is the opposite of justice. It is injustice.

So instead of the Injustice League, they should be called the Mercy League ?

Mercy can given within the confines of Justice.
It's not the opposite of Justice.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Rahn127's post
25-05-2016, 05:02 PM
RE: Heaven or Hell? You be the judge!
I would still rather go to Hell. Heaven would be as miserable as a date with Donald Trump.

[Image: dnw9krH.jpg?4]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Heatheness's post
25-05-2016, 05:04 PM
RE: Heaven or Hell? You be the judge!
(25-05-2016 05:02 PM)Heatheness Wrote:  I would still rather go to Hell. Heaven would be as miserable as a date with Donald Trump.

Ew.
Sadcryface

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like kim's post
25-05-2016, 06:19 PM
RE: Heaven or Hell? You be the judge!
(25-05-2016 04:58 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  
(25-05-2016 12:51 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  Because mercy is the opposite of justice. It is injustice.

So instead of the Injustice League, they should be called the Mercy League ?

Mercy can given within the confines of Justice.
It's not the opposite of Justice.

Suppose someone damages your property, say they smash up your car with a brick, and you take them to court to sue them for the $6,000 it cost to fix your car and the judge says I find the defendant guilty, he should rightly pay restitution to the car owner, but I'm feeling merciful today. You don't have to pay restitution. How would this be inside the confines of justice?

Also I hold that justice is objective whereas mercy is arbitrary. Justice is the recognition of what is right which is based on facts. Mercy is the suspension of justice or of the recognition of what is right. How are these not contradictory?

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-05-2016, 07:01 PM
RE: Heaven or Hell? You be the judge!
(25-05-2016 06:19 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  
(25-05-2016 04:58 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  So instead of the Injustice League, they should be called the Mercy League ?

Mercy can given within the confines of Justice.
It's not the opposite of Justice.

Suppose someone damages your property, say they smash up your car with a brick, and you take them to court to sue them for the $6,000 it cost to fix your car and the judge says I find the defendant guilty, he should rightly pay restitution to the car owner, but I'm feeling merciful today. You don't have to pay restitution. How would this be inside the confines of justice?

Also I hold that justice is objective whereas mercy is arbitrary. Justice is the recognition of what is right which is based on facts. Mercy is the suspension of justice or of the recognition of what is right. How are these not contradictory?

A judge can grant mercy based on the available facts and abilities of the guilty party to either recognize what he or she did wrong or based on their financial ability to be able to pay the money owed.

Within the confines of a justice system, fines or penalties can be reduced, leniency given as a way to make the verdict more just and not simply an arbitrary amount set for all cases.

If the judge has no reason to reduce or eliminate the fine, then it becomes a case of injustice. A judge "feeling merciful" is not a good reason to drop everything. There needs to be some set of circumstances from which mercy is given.

It's all about finding a balance and not applying the same hammer to every nail.

Let's look at two people who steal a piece of fruit from the store. Same crime, so you might think justice is served by giving both people the same penalty for the same crime.

First person is homeless, has no money and hasn't eaten in over a day.
Second person has a rap sheet with thefts going back for years, in and out of prison. Currently has a job and could have paid for the fruit, but didn't want to.

A judge must deal out justice that applies to the person and not just to the crime. Mercy can be given to the homeless man and within justice his penalty lessened or perhaps forgiven.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2016, 08:30 AM
RE: Heaven or Hell? You be the judge!
(25-05-2016 07:01 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  
(25-05-2016 06:19 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  Suppose someone damages your property, say they smash up your car with a brick, and you take them to court to sue them for the $6,000 it cost to fix your car and the judge says I find the defendant guilty, he should rightly pay restitution to the car owner, but I'm feeling merciful today. You don't have to pay restitution. How would this be inside the confines of justice?

Also I hold that justice is objective whereas mercy is arbitrary. Justice is the recognition of what is right which is based on facts. Mercy is the suspension of justice or of the recognition of what is right. How are these not contradictory?

A judge can grant mercy based on the available facts and abilities of the guilty party to either recognize what he or she did wrong or based on their financial ability to be able to pay the money owed.

Within the confines of a justice system, fines or penalties can be reduced, leniency given as a way to make the verdict more just and not simply an arbitrary amount set for all cases.

If the judge has no reason to reduce or eliminate the fine, then it becomes a case of injustice. A judge "feeling merciful" is not a good reason to drop everything. There needs to be some set of circumstances from which mercy is given.

It's all about finding a balance and not applying the same hammer to every nail.

Let's look at two people who steal a piece of fruit from the store. Same crime, so you might think justice is served by giving both people the same penalty for the same crime.

First person is homeless, has no money and hasn't eaten in over a day.
Second person has a rap sheet with thefts going back for years, in and out of prison. Currently has a job and could have paid for the fruit, but didn't want to.

A judge must deal out justice that applies to the person and not just to the crime. Mercy can be given to the homeless man and within justice his penalty lessened or perhaps forgiven.

This is a perfect example of the effects of religion on society. These ideas are a direct result of the teaching of the morality of sacrifice. In the first example mercy or leniency is given on the basis that the person is unable to pay, so the innocent (the car owner) are sacrificed for the good of the guilty. That's right out of Christianity. Jesus was the ideal man supposedly and what did they do, sacrificed the ideal for the non-ideal, the innocent for the guilty, the pure for the un-pure.

The reason that you cite for the judge to be lenient is the guilty party's need. From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. This is again based on the premise that the person's lack of ability, to pay or to think or to get food places some obligation on the person who does not lack the ability to pay or think or produce the values needed to take care of himself. The fruit vendor is out the fruit which he worked for and earned no matter the circumstances of the one who stole it. Again it is sacrifice of the innocent for the good of the guilty, the able to the unable.

Let's take this idea that the judge should weigh all this when deciding punishment or restitution to its logical consequences. You are advocating unequal treatment before the law. The proper purpose of the law and government is to protect the rights of individuals. So under the kind of system of justice you advocate for here, the more retched and pathetic you are the more rights you have. This can only mean that the more able you are and good, the less rights you have. So if a person is able enough and good enough he becomes a rightless creature to be sacrificed and if you become retched enough you get away with murder. This is the kind of system we have today and people wonder why crime is on the rise. What's needed is a system which punishes evil for being evil not a system that rewards it and punishes the good for being the good. For the guilty to be given leniency the innocent must be wronged and denied justice.

This is why our world is the way it is, why there's so much war and violence and injustice because we sacrifice justice in the name of mercy. They are opposites. To say that mercy can be given in the "confines of justice" is a contradiction in terms. It's like saying poison can be eaten within the confines of nourishment.

If you look at the world and are saddened by the state of it, look to the dominant moral ideas and you will see that they are all premised on the morality of sacrifice. What's needed is a new morality which celebrates, supports and rewards the good for being the good.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2016, 11:10 AM
RE: Heaven or Hell? You be the judge!
(25-05-2016 07:26 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(25-05-2016 06:36 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Well, if this were true, I should rest assured that I've become decidedly less judgmental as I've gotten older.

That’s interesting you would say that Robby. I’m not sure if I’m less now that I’m older or simply more aware when I’m doing it and scold myself for it. Consider

It could be more of a case of self awareness for me, too. One thing I have noticed is I am more sensitive to not knowing everything about a person's situation, and realizing there might be some unknowns that justify their position. I am way more likely to be judgmental of people who I know. Once I have a good idea why they're in their position, I feel more comfortable passing judgment.


(25-05-2016 07:26 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  I probably should not be put in the position the OP has described.

Of course, based on the above, if I were to watch my whole life, I might become extremely judgmental of myself. Although, I guess if I largely go about life without guilt, and still have the same mind (albeit without the memories), I would presumably become sympathetic to my own choices and not judge myself to harshly.

That, and I'm also on record for saying that I don't think even Hitler deserves infinity years of torture as punishment, so I would be unlikely to consign anyone to hell...

Except for maybe the entity that thought that an infinite reward/infinite suffering dichotomy was a good idea.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RobbyPants's post
27-05-2016, 01:15 PM
RE: Heaven or Hell? You be the judge!
(25-05-2016 05:04 PM)kim Wrote:  
(25-05-2016 05:02 PM)Heatheness Wrote:  I would still rather go to Hell. Heaven would be as miserable as a date with Donald Trump.

Ew.
Sadcryface

Bet you that's what his daughter said x1000 Shocking

A friend in the hole

"If we're going to be damned, let's be damned for what we really are." - Captain Picard
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-05-2016, 09:54 PM
RE: Heaven or Hell? You be the judge!
I've already seen Hell, and it was kind of 'meh'. Certainly not a place I'd build a summer home or anything, but fun enough to visit with a shotgun and a rocket launcher.

[Image: doom-cacodemons-screenshot_1920.0.jpg]

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2016, 04:48 AM
RE: Heaven or Hell? You be the judge!
I'm going to go "old school" with this.

Let's talk about the Heaven & Hell as invented by the bible. Everyone has somehow re-invented Heaven as the place where you are always happy with all your friends doing whatever you like to do...

That ain't heaven, this is...


There is a constant chant of holy angels that are continually proclaiming Holy, Holy, Holy over the throne of God. The Mercy Seat in heaven where God sits is surrounded by magnificent angels full of glory and power that proclaim and bless the holy name of God without ceasing. Some of these are described as beasts, full of eyes, with six wings and neither rest day or night in their proclaiming the holiness of God (Rev. 4:8-11).

Praising God all the fucking time for eternity, it maybe heaven for god, but for me.

And don't forget the whole "...and there were two women in the kitchen, one will be taken up and the other will be left behind..." etc... So my wife gets to go to heaven and I get to burn in hell...I'm sure that won't bother her any.

Not much of a choice really. Hell please, so at least I can be among friends.

A friend in the hole

"If we're going to be damned, let's be damned for what we really are." - Captain Picard
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unsapien's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: