Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
mSparks

Illegal activities.

51 posts in this topic

Regardless of religious belief, the Ten Commandments are a set of guidelines for how we should live our lives. You don't have to be a religious person to believe in a set of societal rules.

(I don't always follow by them, but I'm only human :) )

Edited by seabass
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The contradiction here is that "legal" and "moral" are two very, very different things.

Morality is decided by god.

Legality is decided by those who wish to farm.

so those who do not have or believe in a god have no morality?

Which of the 10 commandments do you think are optional?

If you don't believe in god and divine retribution why should you obey them?

N.B. there are quite a few circumstances where it is illegal not to break at least one of them.

i am not stating that i am godless... just that the argument that morality is determined by the belief in god does not make sense to me, because someone does not have to believe in god to have high moral standards....

you asked me what 10 commandments i think could be optional...

1. You shall have no other gods before me.

2. You shall not make for yourself any carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.

3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain.

4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your manservant, nor your maidservant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

5. Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you.

6. You shall not murder.

7. You shall not commit adultery.

8. You shall not steal.

9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

10. You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”

#1 - everyone has the right to believe or not believe in whatever god, or however many gods that they choose

#2 - just about every religion / church has these images and statues all over....

#3 - probably break this one every day...

#4 - i can not afford to take a day to sit on my ass and not try to make money somehow...

#5 - a good rule, you should have respect for your parents, but not all parents deserve that respect (thinking of that guy who kept his daughter in the basement and fathered several children with her)

#7 - it is nobody's business what goes on behind closed doors, or with who it is going on with

#10 - don't we all covet the nice things that others have and wish to have for our self?

so that only leaves

#6 - don't kill... good rule

#8 - don't steal.. good rule

#9 - don't be a rat... good rule..

which could be condensed into my catch all law mentioned in a previous post

do not cause directly or indirectly intentional harm physically, or monetarily to any one.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

while things can be overly legislated, and too many laws DO exist, there is a need to have laws... although i think that you really only need one law -

do not cause directly or indirectly intentional harm physically, or monetarily to any one.

this one simple law would cover everything from property damage, theft, DUI, assault rape, murder, etc... with no need for further laws..

At which point you legislated against pretty much any sphere of human activity.

You start up a business doing sec work, your immediately causing monetary damage to your compettition. And you could forget getting insurance, since it'd be illegal under your law as the intent of the insurance company is to cause you fiscal harm by winning what is essentially a legally defined gamble that your house/car wont burn down/be stolen.

The 10 commandments I see as a set of 10 rules to permit groups living in a tribe in the desert to get along with each other. Because they were unruly tribesment, they had to wrap stories around them to give them life and over the centuries they took on a life of their own. Even if you believe in this origin instead of some magic flying cloud guy came down and wrote the whole thing they're still mostly good rules for us to follow.

Ive got a thing about the illegal title too, illegality and morality is a point of view. Someone ELSES point of view that they are imposing through some strong arm tactics (police). We all operate in that grey region (ok, some of us operate in the strictly black) where we do SOME things that aren't legal but they don't morally offend us. Get in your car, doing 38 in a 30? drop some litter in the tube station, I do the speed thing all the time but I don't speed past schools at kicking out time, nor on housing estates, thats my morality kicking in. If you have a strong sense of self morality you will be guided by that, and mostly you'll behave sensibly AND IT WILL KEEP YOU OUT OF TROUBLE AND ALIVE which is what morality is, a self defence mechanism. The police are there for the people with no sense of morality or those with a broken one. But all of this is subjective too, so society gets together and decides a form of mass morality guidelines called "the law". The problem is, we're not being engaged in production of the new laws surrounding our activity, just the commercial keyholders, so the resulting morality won't feel right.

Its this disconnect thats striking a note of discord amongst us here...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of religious belief, the Ten Commandments are a set of guidelines for how we should live our lives. You don't have to be a religious person to believe in a set of societal rules.

(I don't always follow by them, but I'm only human :) )

So, as long as society says its OK, you should stone women to death because they looked at another man the wrong way?

i am not stating that i am godless... just that the argument that morality is determined by the belief in god does not make sense to me, because someone does not have to believe in god to have high moral standards....

Legality is between you and your warlord.

Morality is between you and your maker.

If you have no belief in your maker where do you get your moral guidance from? your warlord?

Get back to work bitch......

Burn that village, they've not paid their taxes....

[EDIT:Don't take this personally, I'm just reflecting the context]

Edited by mSparks
-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At which point you legislated against pretty much any sphere of human activity.

You start up a business doing sec work, your immediately causing monetary damage to your compettition. And you could forget getting insurance, since it'd be illegal under your law as the intent of the insurance company is to cause you fiscal harm by winning what is essentially a legally defined gamble that your house/car wont burn down/be stolen.

i disagree... if you start a business it is not with intention to cause financial harm to your competition - it is to improve your financial situation providing goods and/or services

and the intent of insurance is not to cause you financial harm, it is actually quite the opposite, it is to limit your financial harm in the event of an incident that would cause you to file a claim....

Legality is between you and your warlord.

Morality is between you and your maker.

If you have no belief in your maker where do you get your moral guidance from? your warlord?

Get back to work bitch......

Burn that village, they've not paid their taxes....

[EDIT:Don't take this personally, I'm just reflecting the context]

not taken personally... but i do not see religion mentioned anywhere in the definition of moral

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/moral

–adjective

1.

of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical: moral attitudes.

2.

expressing or conveying truths or counsel as to right conduct, as a speaker or a literary work; moralizing: a moral novel.

3.

founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities, enactment, or custom: moral obligations.

4.

capable of conforming to the rules of right conduct: a moral being.

5.

conforming to the rules of right conduct ( opposed to immoral): a moral man.

6.

virtuous in sexual matters; chaste.

7.

of, pertaining to, or acting on the mind, feelings, will, or character: moral support.

8.

resting upon convincing grounds of probability; virtual: a moral certainty.

–noun

9.

the moral teaching or practical lesson contained in a fable, tale, experience, etc.

10.

the embodiment or type of something.

11.

morals, principles or habits with respect to right or wrong conduct.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At which point you legislated against pretty much any sphere of human activity.

You start up a business doing sec work, your immediately causing monetary damage to your compettition. And you could forget getting insurance, since it'd be illegal under your law as the intent of the insurance company is to cause you fiscal harm by winning what is essentially a legally defined gamble that your house/car wont burn down/be stolen.

i disagree... if you start a business it is not with intention to cause financial harm to your competition - it is to improve your financial situation providing goods and/or services

and the intent of insurance is not to cause you financial harm, it is actually quite the opposite, it is to limit your financial harm in the event of an incident that would cause you to file a claim....

Legality is between you and your warlord.

Morality is between you and your maker.

If you have no belief in your maker where do you get your moral guidance from? your warlord?

Get back to work bitch......

Burn that village, they've not paid their taxes....

[EDIT:Don't take this personally, I'm just reflecting the context]

not taken personally... but i do not see religion mentioned anywhere in the definition of moral

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/moral

–adjective

1.

of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical: moral attitudes.

2.

expressing or conveying truths or counsel as to right conduct, as a speaker or a literary work; moralizing: a moral novel.

3.

founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities, enactment, or custom: moral obligations.

4.

capable of conforming to the rules of right conduct: a moral being.

5.

conforming to the rules of right conduct ( opposed to immoral): a moral man.

6.

virtuous in sexual matters; chaste.

7.

of, pertaining to, or acting on the mind, feelings, will, or character: moral support.

8.

resting upon convincing grounds of probability; virtual: a moral certainty.

–noun

9.

the moral teaching or practical lesson contained in a fable, tale, experience, etc.

10.

the embodiment or type of something.

11.

morals, principles or habits with respect to right or wrong conduct.

Au Contrare.

Its littered with them.

http://powertochange.com/discover/faith/questionsaboutgod6/

This does not apply to the internet.

For we are all gods.

Edited by mSparks
-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At which point you legislated against pretty much any sphere of human activity.

You start up a business doing sec work, your immediately causing monetary damage to your compettition. And you could forget getting insurance, since it'd be illegal under your law as the intent of the insurance company is to cause you fiscal harm by winning what is essentially a legally defined gamble that your house/car wont burn down/be stolen.

i disagree... if you start a business it is not with intention to cause financial harm to your competition - it is to improve your financial situation providing goods and/or services

and the intent of insurance is not to cause you financial harm, it is actually quite the opposite, it is to limit your financial harm in the event of an incident that would cause you to file a claim....

Legality is between you and your warlord.

Morality is between you and your maker.

If you have no belief in your maker where do you get your moral guidance from? your warlord?

Get back to work bitch......

Burn that village, they've not paid their taxes....

[EDIT:Don't take this personally, I'm just reflecting the context]

not taken personally... but i do not see religion mentioned anywhere in the definition of moral

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/moral

–adjective

1.

of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical: moral attitudes.

2.

expressing or conveying truths or counsel as to right conduct, as a speaker or a literary work; moralizing: a moral novel.

3.

founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities, enactment, or custom: moral obligations.

4.

capable of conforming to the rules of right conduct: a moral being.

5.

conforming to the rules of right conduct ( opposed to immoral): a moral man.

6.

virtuous in sexual matters; chaste.

7.

of, pertaining to, or acting on the mind, feelings, will, or character: moral support.

8.

resting upon convincing grounds of probability; virtual: a moral certainty.

–noun

9.

the moral teaching or practical lesson contained in a fable, tale, experience, etc.

10.

the embodiment or type of something.

11.

morals, principles or habits with respect to right or wrong conduct.

Au Contrare.

Its littered with them.

http://powertochange.com/discover/faith/questionsaboutgod6/

This does not apply to the internet.

For we are all gods.

going to have to agree to disagree on this one... the dictionary definition does not mention religion in the definition of moral once... the words that you put into bold do not relate to religion, right, or right or wrong is not a cause of or effect of any religion...

the link provided does nothing to define morals as anything between a person and their god...

morals can come from religion, but they do not necessarily have to...

finally the definition of fable is a story that teaches morals - not necessarily a religious story...

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fable

–noun

1.

a short tale to teach a moral lesson, often with animals or inanimate objects as characters; apologue: the fable of the tortoise and the hare; Aesop's fables.

2.

a story not founded on fact: This biography is largely a self-laudatory fable.

3.

a story about supernatural or extraordinary persons or incidents; legend: the fables of gods and heroes.

4.

legends or myths collectively: the heroes of Greek fable.

5.

an untruth; falsehood: This boast of a cure is a Medical fable.

6.

the plot of an epic, a dramatic poem, or a play.

7.

idle talk: old wives' fables.

–verb (used without object)

8.

to tell or write fables.

9.

to speak falsely; lie: to fable about one's past.

–verb (used with object)

10.

to describe as if actually so; talk about as if true: She is fabled to be the natural daughter of a king.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

going to have to agree to disagree on this one... the dictionary definition does not mention religion in the definition of moral once... the words that you put into bold do not relate to religion, right, or right or wrong is not a cause of or effect of any religion...

the link provided does nothing to define morals as anything between a person and their god...

morals can come from religion, but they do not necessarily have to...

finally the definition of fable is a story that teaches morals - not necessarily a religious story...

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fable

So how do you define "right and wrong" in the "moral" sense then?

For me its best described as a "conscience" - your personal telephone line to your maker, it doesn't make the blindest bit of difference if you believe there is anyone on the other end or not, (or even if you ignore it when it rings).

Its there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscience

Personally, I'd rather not piss off someone with the ability to direct dial into everyones head, but I'll take my chances with twats who want to boss me around for their own gain.

Edited by mSparks
-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

going to have to agree to disagree on this one... the dictionary definition does not mention religion in the definition of moral once... the words that you put into bold do not relate to religion, right, or right or wrong is not a cause of or effect of any religion...

the link provided does nothing to define morals as anything between a person and their god...

morals can come from religion, but they do not necessarily have to...

finally the definition of fable is a story that teaches morals - not necessarily a religious story...

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fable

So how do you define "right and wrong" in the "moral" sense then?

For me its best described as a "conscience" - your personal telephone line to your maker, it doesn't make the blindest bit of difference if you believe there is anyone on the other end or not, (or even if you ignore it when it rings).

Its there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscience

Personally, I'd rather not piss off someone with the ability to direct dial into everyones head, but I'll take my chances with twats who want to boss me around for their own gain.

right = benefits society or at bare minimal has no negative effects on anyone...

wrong = effecting society or others in a negative way

moral = ethical

if you need religion to define morality, or for you to know right from wrong than i am not trying to undermine that, i am merely stating that knowing right from wrong, having morals (and now a conscience) does not disappear when there is a lack of religious motivation.

within the wiki link that you provided

Although humanity has no generally accepted definition of conscience or universal agreement about its role in ethical decision-making, three overlapping approaches have significantly addressed these issues:[2]

1. Religious views

2. Secular views

3. Philosophical views

so religious views is one of the possible definitions of conscience - but a further look shows that it could be linked to other factors that are unrelated to religion...

again - i stress, i am not trying to insult anyone's religious beliefs or practices, only stating that it is possible to live with morals, and know right from wrong with out the need for religion.... i am not trying to start a religious war in the threads here, especially with christmas just around the corner... =)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

going to have to agree to disagree on this one... the dictionary definition does not mention religion in the definition of moral once... the words that you put into bold do not relate to religion, right, or right or wrong is not a cause of or effect of any religion...

the link provided does nothing to define morals as anything between a person and their god...

morals can come from religion, but they do not necessarily have to...

finally the definition of fable is a story that teaches morals - not necessarily a religious story...

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fable

So how do you define "right and wrong" in the "moral" sense then?

For me its best described as a "conscience" - your personal telephone line to your maker, it doesn't make the blindest bit of difference if you believe there is anyone on the other end or not, (or even if you ignore it when it rings).

Its there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscience

Personally, I'd rather not piss off someone with the ability to direct dial into everyones head, but I'll take my chances with twats who want to boss me around for their own gain.

right = benefits society or at bare minimal has no negative effects on anyone...

wrong = effecting society or others in a negative way

moral = ethical

if you need religion to define morality, or for you to know right from wrong than i am not trying to undermine that, i am merely stating that knowing right from wrong, having morals (and now a conscience) does not disappear when there is a lack of religious motivation.

within the wiki link that you provided

Although humanity has no generally accepted definition of conscience or universal agreement about its role in ethical decision-making, three overlapping approaches have significantly addressed these issues:[2]

1. Religious views

2. Secular views

3. Philosophical views

so religious views is one of the possible definitions of conscience - but a further look shows that it could be linked to other factors that are unrelated to religion...

again - i stress, i am not trying to insult anyone's religious beliefs or practices, only stating that it is possible to live with morals, and know right from wrong with out the need for religion.... i am not trying to start a religious war in the threads here, especially with christmas just around the corner... =)

Think you are probably arguing with yourself there, since I never mentioned religion. If you look at that wiki page the same applies (legal between you and your warlord, moral between you and your maker) even if you think your maker is darwins evolution. All I pointed out earlier is if you don't believe in god and divine retribution, then you have as much to fear from commiting a bit of genocide as you do from doing a rather large belch in polite company.

-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think you are probably arguing with yourself there, since I never mentioned religion. If you look at that wiki page the same applies (legal between you and your warlord, moral between you and your maker) even if you think your maker is darwins evolution. All I pointed out earlier is if you don't believe in god and divine retribution, then you have as much to fear from commiting a bit of genocide as you do from doing a rather large belch in polite company.

i guess it is back to the dictionary

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/maker

Maker (ˈmeɪkə) [Click for IPA pronunciation guide]

— n

1. a title given to God

2. go to meet one's Maker , meet one's Maker to die

since maker is a title given to god, i just assumed that this:

Morality is between you and your maker.

meant you were defining morality as something that was due to ones religious beliefs... while some people may gain moral guidance from religion, morals or morality do not need to come from religion/spirituality..

i will agree that most people probably get their moral guidance from their religion, but i do not believe that people who are not religious or spiritual have no morals...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think you are probably arguing with yourself there, since I never mentioned religion. If you look at that wiki page the same applies (legal between you and your warlord, moral between you and your maker) even if you think your maker is darwins evolution. All I pointed out earlier is if you don't believe in god and divine retribution, then you have as much to fear from commiting a bit of genocide as you do from doing a rather large belch in polite company.

i guess it is back to the dictionary

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/maker

Maker (ˈmeɪkə) [Click for IPA pronunciation guide]

— n

1. a title given to God

2. go to meet one's Maker , meet one's Maker to die

since maker is a title given to god, i just assumed that this:

Morality is between you and your maker.

meant you were defining morality as something that was due to ones religious beliefs... while some people may gain moral guidance from religion, morals or morality do not need to come from religion/spirituality..

i will agree that most people probably get their moral guidance from their religion, but i do not believe that people who are not religious or spiritual have no morals...

You don't need a "religion" to have a conscience.

You definitely don't need a "religion" to be "spiritual"

You don't need to believe in god to have him direct your life and tell you right from wrong.

But

If you don't believe in god, then these guys:

devil%2Band%2Bangel%2Bhomer2.jpg

Are something you can safely ignore as long as you end up better off now.

AKA

selling your soul to the devil. (souls are cheap these days, you can pick them up in the secondary market for a tiny fraction of the price it cost for Judas Iscariot).

"religion" is just the institutional study of this aspect of life, mixed in with everything that is wrong with institutions.

Edited by mSparks
-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't need a "religion" to have a conscience.

You definitely don't need a "religion" to be "spiritual"

You don't need to believe in god to have him direct your life and tell you right from wrong.

But

If you don't believe in god, then these guys:

Are something you can safely ignore as long as you end up better off now.

AKA

selling your soul to the devil. (souls are cheap these days, you can pick them up in the secondary market for a tiny fraction of the price it cost for Judas Iscariot).

"religion" is just the institutional study of this aspect of life, mixed in with everything that is wrong with institutions.

so, is the conscience god's direct line to someone's brain? i wonder how it is different people's consciences can lead them to opposite actions... also, why not prevent evil in the first place instead of just giving advice? what if someone makes their decisions with a careful, rational evaluation of the situation & its consequences instead of listening to their conscience?

frankly, i find your definition of morality as "god's law delivered via conscience" inconsistent. it is contradicted in the case of two people's consciences prompting them to do opposite actions. there's also the fact that such a definition is making an unjustified assumption on the existence of a god, but that's an entirely different subject altogether.

returning to the original topic, my opinion is that information & discussion should be as free as possible, with a minimum number of topics censored. I think that any topic should be up for discussion, provided the discussion itself won't directly harm someone physically or financially (yes, ignoring emotionally). obviously however, things are a bit stricter here in the interest of not having binrev taken down by DHS/ICE/whoever, which is regrettable but understandable to keep the community alive. there's still debate to do with the grey areas of free speech, but there's ways to indulge in such discussions away from prying eyes.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't need a "religion" to have a conscience.

You definitely don't need a "religion" to be "spiritual"

You don't need to believe in god to have him direct your life and tell you right from wrong.

But

If you don't believe in god, then these guys:

Are something you can safely ignore as long as you end up better off now.

AKA

selling your soul to the devil. (souls are cheap these days, you can pick them up in the secondary market for a tiny fraction of the price it cost for Judas Iscariot).

"religion" is just the institutional study of this aspect of life, mixed in with everything that is wrong with institutions.

so, is the conscience god's direct line to someone's brain? i wonder how it is different people's consciences can lead them to opposite actions... also, why not prevent evil in the first place instead of just giving advice? what if someone makes their decisions with a careful, rational evaluation of the situation & its consequences instead of listening to their conscience?

frankly, i find your definition of morality as "god's law delivered via conscience" inconsistent. it is contradicted in the case of two people's consciences prompting them to do opposite actions. there's also the fact that such a definition is making an unjustified assumption on the existence of a god, but that's an entirely different subject altogether.

returning to the original topic, my opinion is that information & discussion should be as free as possible, with a minimum number of topics censored. I think that any topic should be up for discussion, provided the discussion itself won't directly harm someone physically or financially (yes, ignoring emotionally). obviously however, things are a bit stricter here in the interest of not having binrev taken down by DHS/ICE/whoever, which is regrettable but understandable to keep the community alive. there's still debate to do with the grey areas of free speech, but there's ways to indulge in such discussions away from prying eyes.

Because morals are obviously uniform across the globe and free will is a bad thing.....

Good Grief.

As for "it is contradicted in the case of two people's consciences prompting them to do opposite actions"

Didn't mommy ever teach you to count.

Thats one little angel on one shoulder

and

one little devil on the other

1+1 = 2.

Magic!!

You can take that personally as I really am taking the piss :laugh:

Edited by mSparks
-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allowing religion to dictate what you consider right and wrong, is passing the buck off to someone else for your own behaviour.

The people stoning the women to death are finding it morally acceptable to do so because their religion says its so.

There are numerous serial killers who went insane and killed innocent people because "god" told them to do so.

I accept responsibility for my own actions and thoughts. I am a person of quality. Not a person of dogma.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allowing religion to dictate what you consider right and wrong, is passing the buck off to someone else for your own behaviour.

The people stoning the women to death are finding it morally acceptable to do so because their religion says its so.

There are numerous serial killers who went insane and killed innocent people because "god" told them to do so.

I accept responsibility for my own actions and thoughts. I am a person of quality. Not a person of dogma.

well said..

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are numerous serial killers who went insane and killed innocent people because "god" told them to do so.

I'm guessing it was really the other guy......

Apple anyone?

-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are numerous serial killers who went insane and killed innocent people because "god" told them to do so.

I'm guessing it was really the other guy......

Apple anyone?

No thanks.. I perfer Linux.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are numerous serial killers who went insane and killed innocent people because "god" told them to do so.

I'm guessing it was really the other guy......

Apple anyone?

No thanks.. I perfer Linux.

Am I the only one who finds it completely ironic that PurpleJesus posted in a thread that has turned into a religious firefight? Anyone...anyone?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bio and animal research show that "doing the right thing" manifests itself in many creatures of the earth. It's actually not unique to humans. As a simple thought experiment, try to explain why cats have been known to save other pets, including dogs, from burning buildings. There is absolutely no religious component to that compassion. There is also no known survival component to it. In other words, it originates in something we have yet to understand.

In terms of "illegal things", as long as I can remember, those discussions never took place in detail on public forums. Granted, I didn't hang on IRC, but all other scenes, the best discussion happened between a few select people who spoke out of band after observing/interacting with each other in the public forum. So the desire to keep the Binrev forums alive and well by curtailing discussion of illegal actions is actually a help to the community. People will meet, interact and eventually decide whom to trust for things that may cross the line.

By the way, we all do eventually trust somebody - whether it's the hacker in the forum or the perceived dude in the sky. Not all of your beliefs and skills come from direct experience and verification.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are numerous serial killers who went insane and killed innocent people because "god" told them to do so.

I'm guessing it was really the other guy......

Apple anyone?

No thanks.. I perfer Linux.

Am I the only one who finds it completely ironic that PurpleJesus posted in a thread that has turned into a religious firefight? Anyone...anyone?

It was quite amusing...

Anyway.

Back on topic.

http://www.ripoffreport.com/prostitutes/megan-blockowicz-mar/megan-blockowicz-mary-blockow-47e98.htm

-2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And lets get one thing straight.

There is nothing illegal in publishing any URL. Its even been tested in court.

Certain retarded polititions who say things like " Linux is not concerned by music or movie piracy because it had "high performance firewalls" [sic] such as "Open Office" [!!]." want to make it illegal."

But its not.

And the support for this kind of crap, imho, makes you as retarded as the ass hats who want to implement it.

Or should any major paper that mentions thepiratebay be shut down?

Edited by mSparks
-2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And lets get one thing straight.

There is nothing illegal in publishing any URL. Its even been tested in court.

Certain retarded polititions who say things like " Linux is not concerned by music or movie piracy because it had "high performance firewalls" [sic] such as "Open Office" [!!]." want to make it illegal."

But its not.

And the support for this kind of crap, imho, makes you as retarded as the ass hats who want to implement it.

Or should any major paper that mentions thepiratebay be shut down?

Are you going to pay the legal fees? You are so sure that it will stand up in court and has been proven many times, then you can go ahead and send me a blank check to cover the legal fees. Put your money where your mouth is.

I don't think anyone disagrees with you. We support freedom of speech and information, but even if we do win in a long drawn out court battle, who is going to pay for it? Me? You? And what about my life and job while that battle goes on? I don't have that time. You seem to have a lot of it to post so much on the subject, so I will send them to you.

This is naivety at its finest. We always have someone come in and start preaching without having a clue what it really takes to run a web site for any length of time. The bottom line is that we have forum rules to save people from themselves and save me from lawsuits that I cannot afford. We are pretty flexible with most situations, I think. If you want warez, then go find another board. If you want to swap virus code, there are sites for that too (although they all keep disappearing...I wonder why?). If you just want to bitch about binrev, then keep going since we DO allow that and support your freedom of speech to bitch and moan.

But no one will take you seriously.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is naivety at its finest. We always have someone come in and start preaching without having a clue what it really takes to run a web site for any length of time. The bottom line is that we have forum rules to save people from themselves and save me from lawsuits that I cannot afford. We are pretty flexible with most situations, I think. If you want warez, then go find another board. If you want to swap virus code, there are sites for that too (although they all keep disappearing...I wonder why?). If you just want to bitch about binrev, then keep going since we DO allow that and support your freedom of speech to bitch and moan.

Compromising your principles just because a few mainstream media outlets publish some token court cases does not make you informed, it makes you a sheeple.

And, Any length of time?

theborgmatrix has been going since 1997, so don't give me any tosh about "any length of time".

Especially on a site owned by IP Board.

Edited by mSparks
-2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is naivety at its finest. We always have someone come in and start preaching without having a clue what it really takes to run a web site for any length of time. The bottom line is that we have forum rules to save people from themselves and save me from lawsuits that I cannot afford. We are pretty flexible with most situations, I think. If you want warez, then go find another board. If you want to swap virus code, there are sites for that too (although they all keep disappearing...I wonder why?). If you just want to bitch about binrev, then keep going since we DO allow that and support your freedom of speech to bitch and moan.

Compromising your principles just because a few mainstream media outlets publish some token court cases does not make you informed, it makes you a sheeple.

And, Any length of time?

theborgmatrix has been going since 1997, so don't give me any tosh about "any length of time".

Especially on a site owned by IP Board.

My God, I cannot believe that I am replying to this...

1) Where did I compromise my principals exactly? I don't support or condone piracy. I do not support black hat activities like viruses and defacements. Those ARE my principals. Those are the rules to MY site. I made them, and did not get them from the mainstream media. You are sadly ignorant on me and on the principals of this site.

2) Anyone can run a NON HACKING web site. I meant (and I think everyone but you knew this) a site of questionable content. Anyone can run a blog or site about gaming or other non fringe topic. You really think you are comparing apples to apples there?

And with that said, I am pulling out of this thread since I am pretty sure that my point is clear and the rules are what they are and if you don't like them, you can leave just like anyone else.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0