Westminster attacker
-
Mark_Wallace wrote:
The trouble is that, in order to perform an attack of that kind, someone has to have mental problems
So you're saying that all criminals have mental health problems? That it's incapable that someone is just not a very nice person with low levels of empathy or compassion?
Mark_Wallace wrote:
Oh, wait. It was the Sun
I could at least understand why you would attempt that ad hominem attack if I was discussing news or facts, but I think I made it quite clear this was simply an opinion piece so the paper itself doesn't have a lot to do with it. Nice try though at trying to belittle the issue by criticising the source rather than facing up to the issue itself. After all, had I have said it was the Mail you wouldn't have said "Oh, wait, It was the Mail". If it was the Guardian you wouldn't have said "Oh, wait, It was the Guardian." If it was the Independent you wouldn't have said "Oh, wait, It was the Independent." If it was the Upper Middle-Marsh Telegraph you wouldn't have said "Oh, wait, It was the Upper Middle-Marsh Telegraph." I mean your post came from a genuine specific concern, you weren't going to simply try and dismiss the whole thing based on the source regardless of what that source was.......were you.....?
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
So you're saying that all criminals have mental health problems
I see why you're so quick to accuse others of using straw-man arguments -- you do it yourself so often, that you believe everyone behaves that way. The point, however, which has nothing to do with any straw men you might throw into the mix, is that the nutter attacked one of the most heavily watched and defended streets in the world, with nothing but a sharp, pointy thing, so yes, it's pretty certain that he has mental problems. As for the rest of your rant: you're just being ridiculous. Either calm the **** down or grow the **** up, whichever will help most.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
They're often making the right decision. The problem is their utility function is corrupted, it incorrectly distinguishes between world states after their death. They should all be valued zero since nothing can affect you after your death, but they've been tricked into believing that there is something after death. That is a very dangerous concept that should have been banned ages ago, since giving world states past your death a positive utility can make people decide that doing something that they will be killed for is worth doing.
If that doesn't qualify under "while the balance of the mind was disturbed", then nothing does.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Mark_Wallace wrote:
So you're saying that they are really all ter'r'rists?
No.
Mark_Wallace wrote:
No straw men to see around here, ladies and gentlemen. Move along, now.
I dunno, your accusation above pretty sure looked like one.
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
Mark_Wallace wrote:
So you're saying that they are really all ter'r'rists?
No.
Actually, you did precisely that. You accused a developer's colleague developers of secretly being ter'r'rists, and of sneaking around behind their colleagues' backs with evil and ter'r'ristic intent. If you said something like that about me in front of my colleagues, I'd chin ya -- so then you could elevate your accusations yet further. See how it works? Watch your mouth, or the Muslims aren't the problem; you are.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
NoNotThatBob wrote:
all these punishments (except the treatment of rape victims) are present in the Old Testament.
Books and passages please?
Hey, don't expect anyone who claims to be a Christian in CP to have actually read the Bible! It's just something they use to "prove" that they're better than others.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Having imaginary friends after childhood is mental illness. If I call him Napoleone Bonaparte I get detained and ill-considered, if i call him Jesus or Allah or whatever then I'm pious and well received by society.
* CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF * GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X * Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game. * I'm a puny punmaker.
Try calling him the Great Lord Cthulhu, no one will dare detain you whilst they call upon the Lord of the Deep's wrath! :D
Best, Sander arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript SQL Server for C# Developers Succinctly Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
Hey, don't expect anyone who claims to be a Christian in CP to have actually read the Bible! It's just something they use to "prove" that they're better than others.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Mark_Wallace wrote:
Hey, don't expect anyone who claims to be a Christian in CP to have actually read the Bible!
Where did I claim to be a Christian? I merely stated:
Quote:
all these punishments (except the treatment of rape victims) are present in the Old Testament.
(The treatment of rape victims would depend upon the circumstance of the rape. For instance a victim would not be killed if the rape occured in the countryside.) Buy, hey! I don't expect anyone who claims to quote Marx on CP to have actually read the Communist Manifesto or Das Kapital!
-
Levictus 20:9 He who curses his mother father must be killed. Levictus 21:17-24 Exodus 21:20-21 are also interesting.
Leviticus is instruction for a specific branch of priesthood which ended during the Roman empire, it is not instruction for the people. Holiness code - Wikipedia[^] Now as I originally asked can you please show me where in The Bible it says that non-Christians and homosexuals should be killed.
-
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
Books and passages please?
Oh no, after you, Claude!
ie you can't, ie you were wrong.
-
ie you can't, ie you were wrong.
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
ie you can't,
Indeed I can, Claude, but as you made your claims first, I felt it only fair that you provide evidence for them, before I provided evidence for mine. As you admitted to merely being facetious (no, it wasn't sarcasm), and hence "not to be taken seriously or literally", I have not bothered to reply.
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
ie you were wrong
Nope, all these punishments (except the treatment of rape victims) are present in the Old Testament. (As are those performed by extreme Muslims.)
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
Leviticus is instruction for a specific branch of priesthood which ended during the Roman empire, it is not instruction for the people.
Nope. "A little learning is a dangerous thing", i.e., you are wrong.
-
Leviticus is instruction for a specific branch of priesthood which ended during the Roman empire, it is not instruction for the people. Holiness code - Wikipedia[^] Now as I originally asked can you please show me where in The Bible it says that non-Christians and homosexuals should be killed.
You didn't ask me and I never said it.
-
Leviticus is instruction for a specific branch of priesthood which ended during the Roman empire, it is not instruction for the people. Holiness code - Wikipedia[^] Now as I originally asked can you please show me where in The Bible it says that non-Christians and homosexuals should be killed.
You didn't ask me and I never said it.
-
You didn't ask me and I never said it.
So why did you respond with something nothing to do with what I asked about? Now you've been proven wrong you just want to distance yourself from your post.
-
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
ie you can't,
Indeed I can, Claude, but as you made your claims first, I felt it only fair that you provide evidence for them, before I provided evidence for mine. As you admitted to merely being facetious (no, it wasn't sarcasm), and hence "not to be taken seriously or literally", I have not bothered to reply.
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
ie you were wrong
Nope, all these punishments (except the treatment of rape victims) are present in the Old Testament. (As are those performed by extreme Muslims.)
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
Leviticus is instruction for a specific branch of priesthood which ended during the Roman empire, it is not instruction for the people.
Nope. "A little learning is a dangerous thing", i.e., you are wrong.
NoNotThatBob wrote:
Indeed I can
So do so or admit you are wrong.
-
NoNotThatBob wrote:
Indeed I can
So do so or admit you are wrong.
Sorry, Claude, you have to confess to your error re Leviticus first., as I intend using it.
-
Sorry, Claude, you have to confess to your error re Leviticus first., as I intend using it.
So you were wrong.
