Is human life sacred?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-04-2013, 01:06 PM
RE: Is human life sacred?
Nor less. Importance and sacredness are equally subjective.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes fat cat's post
16-04-2013, 01:22 PM
RE: Is human life sacred?
I think this is relative from an individual from another. Depends on education, brain chemistry or any other factors.
My empathy and education determines me to have some respect for life, however, a psychopath might not think/feel the same.
But theoretically, I don't think human life is more sacred than animal life.

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." - Benjamin Franklin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2013, 01:24 PM
RE: Is human life sacred?
(16-04-2013 12:28 PM)Hobbitgirl Wrote:  Human life is no more important than any other life.

So if a flea and Near were dying and you could only save 1 of them, you'd flip a coin? Drinking Beverage

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2013, 02:47 PM
RE: Is human life sacred?
If I may (cuz, like, y'now, I will), the sacred does not strictly require God, Gods, spirits, or deities of any kind. The sacred is a relationship. Nothing is sacred as an absolute insofar as the sacred is a social construction just like any other concept. So the answer is, that which is sacred is sacred because we make it sacred. We choose to enter into and maintain a sacred relationship with the sacred.

The statement "nothing is sacred" is not an objective statement, but rather a choice. "I choose not to have a relationship with the sacred."

(There's a book by Jerry Mander that keeps popping up like it wants me to read it called "In the Absence of the Sacred: The Failure of Technology and the Survival of the Indian Nations)

I don't know, but I suspect, that for many people, this choice is made in protest of the demands of religions to enter into and maintain sacred relationships. There's also this sense that humans aren't special in the intergalactic ubiquity of life kind of sense, but as far as I'm concerned, that doesn't mean that human life cannot be sacred.

To be honest, I pity those that have lost entirely the ability to enter into sacred relationships because they can be quite rewarding.

For some, like my devout Catholic friend who is considering a vow of chastity, the sacred is intimately wrapped up in religion (chastity... Not for me at all Cool ). For others, it's simply a matter of sacred ritual; the ritual being the thing that connects them to the sacred. For others, monogamy can be sacred: the act of remaining faithful being a deep reward.

For many hunter gatherers, there is a sacred relationship between the hunter and the animal. For those who eat factory farmed food, there is not. Very much not. For some people, monogamy is a joke, something to be broken without the other knowing.

I also suspect that the outright rejection of the sacred plays perfectly into the industrial agenda and its goal to mechanise man and the world around us.

Anyhoo, all I'm saying is that a relationship with the sacred is not a relationship with God, it's a relationship with the sacred. For many, God is sacred, but it could just as easily be animals, plants, the Earth, your marriage and, yes, the lives of other people.

So to answer the OP, human lives are sacred... To me anyway.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2013, 02:53 PM
RE: Is human life sacred?
(16-04-2013 02:47 PM)Ghost Wrote:  If I may (cuz, like, y'now, I will), the sacred does not strictly require God, Gods, spirits, or deities of any kind. The sacred is a relationship. Nothing is sacred as an absolute insofar as the sacred is a social construction just like any other concept. So the answer is, that which is sacred is sacred because we make it sacred. We choose to enter into and maintain a sacred relationship with the sacred.

The statement "nothing is sacred" is not an objective statement, but rather a choice. "I choose not to have a relationship with the sacred."

(There's a book by Jerry Mander that keeps popping up like it wants me to read it called "In the Absence of the Sacred: The Failure of Technology and the Survival of the Indian Nations)

I don't know, but I suspect, that for many people, this choice is made in protest of the demands of religions to enter into and maintain sacred relationships. There's also this sense that humans aren't special in the intergalactic ubiquity of life kind of sense, but as far as I'm concerned, that doesn't mean that human life cannot be sacred.

To be honest, I pity those that have lost entirely the ability to enter into sacred relationships because they can be quite rewarding.

For some, like my devout Catholic friend who is considering a vow of chastity, the sacred is intimately wrapped up in religion (chastity... Not for me at all Cool ). For others, it's simply a matter of sacred ritual; the ritual being the thing that connects them to the sacred. For others, monogamy can be sacred: the act of remaining faithful being a deep reward.

For many hunter gatherers, there is a sacred relationship between the hunter and the animal. For those who eat factory farmed food, there is not. Very much not. For some people, monogamy is a joke, something to be broken without the other knowing.

I also suspect that the outright rejection of the sacred plays perfectly into the industrial agenda and its goal to mechanise man and the world around us.

Anyhoo, all I'm saying is that a relationship with the sacred is not a relationship with God, it's a relationship with the sacred. For many, God is sacred, but it could just as easily be animals, plants, the Earth, your marriage and, yes, the lives of other people.

So to answer the OP, human lives are sacred... To me anyway.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt

But Matty, you had to make up your own definition to reach that conclusion. The word sacred literally means "connected with the gods." It means something that has been set aside as having a characteristic of holiness; containing a sense of "godness" within itself.

So you can say something is "special" or "valued," but unless you want to describe something that is imbued with "godness" then no, it's not sacred. Tongue

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2013, 03:25 PM
RE: Is human life sacred?
We are shit. We really are... all we do is fuck everything up.

If there was some species that would be sacred, then it probably wouldn't be us... we are cunts. What is there in a human life that has much value?

If I was God, I would have eradicated humans long ago and stuck our file in the "failed experiments" cabinet.

[Image: opforum1.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes frankiej's post
16-04-2013, 03:37 PM (This post was last modified: 16-04-2013 03:41 PM by Hobbitgirl.)
RE: Is human life sacred?
(16-04-2013 01:24 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  
(16-04-2013 12:28 PM)Hobbitgirl Wrote:  Human life is no more important than any other life.

So if a flea and Near were dying and you could only save 1 of them, you'd flip a coin? Drinking Beverage

If you're talking emotionally than sure, of course we assign value to things. Rationally, however in the grand scheme of things no, no life is more important.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2013, 03:44 PM
RE: Is human life sacred?
(16-04-2013 03:37 PM)Hobbitgirl Wrote:  
(16-04-2013 01:24 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  So if a flea and Near were dying and you could only save 1 of them, you'd flip a coin? Drinking Beverage

If you're talking emotionally than sure, of course we assign value to things. Rationally, however in the grand scheme of things no, no life is more important.

Near! Flee! Shocking

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
16-04-2013, 03:45 PM
RE: Is human life sacred?
(16-04-2013 03:44 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-04-2013 03:37 PM)Hobbitgirl Wrote:  If you're talking emotionally than sure, of course we assign value to things. Rationally, however in the grand scheme of things no, no life is more important.

Near! Flee! Shocking

Sorry I already have him trapped. Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Hobbitgirl's post
16-04-2013, 03:53 PM
RE: Is human life sacred?
(16-04-2013 03:37 PM)Hobbitgirl Wrote:  
(16-04-2013 01:24 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  So if a flea and Near were dying and you could only save 1 of them, you'd flip a coin? Drinking Beverage

If you're talking emotionally than sure, of course we assign value to things. Rationally, however in the grand scheme of things no, no life is more important.

I just wanted to take a moment to say that just because I don't feel that humans are more important than other life on the planet does not mean that I do not love and care for people deeply. Bastards. Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: