Conquer Club

Ditocoaf wrote:Wait, we're getting too nuanced too quickly. We'd better slow down and let some people catch up.

All i managed to take on board was that Adolf had one bollock (and i knew that before, so I'm none the wiser)

Pedronicus wrote:

Ditocoaf wrote:Wait, we're getting too nuanced too quickly. We'd better slow down and let some people catch up.

All i managed to take on board was that Adolf had one bollock (and i knew that before, so I'm none the wiser)

Well he only had one attached to his body. His storeroom was rather different though.

comic boy wrote:

Iliad wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

Iliad wrote:GODWIN"S LAW!!!

I win!! I WIN!!!

Your above comment is irrelivent, the point stands: How far can moral relativism go? At what point is something wrong? If there is no objective measure, then we are talking nihilism.

On the topic of abortion I really think an abortion can be used as long as the child is under 21 years of age. Once he is 21 he is an adult, and deserves life

Would this also apply to Dwarfs, because even at 21 they have not really grown up.

We should apply spartan law: any child that is stunted or deformed is put down. Immediately

Iliad wrote:

comic boy wrote:

Iliad wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

Iliad wrote:GODWIN"S LAW!!!

I win!! I WIN!!!

Your above comment is irrelivent, the point stands: How far can moral relativism go? At what point is something wrong? If there is no objective measure, then we are talking nihilism.

On the topic of abortion I really think an abortion can be used as long as the child is under 21 years of age. Once he is 21 he is an adult, and deserves life

Would this also apply to Dwarfs, because even at 21 they have not really grown up.

We should apply spartan law: any child that is stunted or deformed is put down. Immediately

Because...


THIS

IS

I have to claim this post before someone completes that.

deronimo wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

deronimo wrote:

Iliad wrote:GODWIN"S LAW!!!

I win!! I WIN!!!

I know you're probably just having a bit of fun with Jenos, but Godwin's law was constructed in order to ignore the most obvious example of evil in the world. Many people appeal to the Third Reich as an example or warning. It's such an obvious example that others don't want to acknowledge it so they invoke this farce of Godwin's Law to get around the argument.

That's wrong. The law was constructed to make sure unneccesary references to hitler or the nazis are ignored.

Sure, sure it was

Yep. Hitler was evil, but that doesn't mean that every minute thing he did was evil, or that every detail about him was evil. It can get to the point that any argument can be supported by a Nazi reference.

Godwin's law merely states that if you have to resort to a Nazi reference (which is infinitely flexible, very strong-sounding, but logically flawed), then you're on your last legs and have probably lost the argument already. You're trying to club us with a bludgeon, which is heavy but imprecise. Try being a little more careful.

You know who peed standing up? Hitler did.

Snorri1234 wrote:

Iliad wrote:We should apply spartan law: any child that is stunted or deformed is put down. Immediately

Because...


THIS

IS

THE CONQUER CLUB OFF TOPIC FORUM!!!

deronimo wrote:

Iliad wrote:GODWIN"S LAW!!!

I win!! I WIN!!!

I know you're probably just having a bit of fun with Jenos, but Godwin's law was constructed in order to ignore the most obvious example of evil in the world. Many people appeal to the Third Reich as an example or warning. It's such an obvious example that others don't want to acknowledge it so they invoke this farce of Godwin's Law to get around the argument.

Hence why I keep on after the morons who bring this farce up.

Jenos Ridan wrote:

deronimo wrote:

Iliad wrote:GODWIN"S LAW!!!

I win!! I WIN!!!

I know you're probably just having a bit of fun with Jenos, but Godwin's law was constructed in order to ignore the most obvious example of evil in the world. Many people appeal to the Third Reich as an example or warning. It's such an obvious example that others don't want to acknowledge it so they invoke this farce of Godwin's Law to get around the argument.

Hence why I keep on after the morons who bring this farce up.

OK, let me rephrase Godwin's Law (as it has come to be used). If you allege that the opposition in a debate is like Hitler/the Nazis you have fallen back on something so cliched, so persistently incorrect, so uncreative, that you are deemed to have lost the debate because of poor argument. While the poor argument bit is usually true, the rule is more of a meme than a set law, referred to in jest. I believe the 's might have tipped you off to that.

Dancing Mustard wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:But it is good to see Prancing Custard show his true colors when someone else uses the word play in his posts.

What are you talking about?

Dancing Mustard wrote:Jenos teh Ridanz

Need I say (well, actually, it was you who said that) more or will you own up to your error?

Dancing Mustard wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:To say nothing about how he's been played like a two-dollar flute.

Mirror, Jenos. Jenos, Mirror.

Oh hang on, I see you've already met.

Ok, deny that I baited the guy in another thread. Doesn't matter to me, but you seem to have taken a shot to the ol' pride.

Dancing Mustard wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:On a side note: if ethics have no validity, what good are they?

They're really handy mental constructs that can be wielded by the church as an instrument of empty social control.

Really, there's no such thing as ethics... which is why all your anti-abortion arguments fall down.

Great job, you've just dropped a big, stinky load on thousands of years of human, sectarian AND secular, thought on the matter of ethics.

I hope you are satisfied with yourself.

Being attacked by Jenos is akin to being molested by a stunted Piranha who has yet to recover from a major bout of dental surgery. Mind you his use of irony is equisite ....calling other people morons

comic boy wrote:Being attacked by Jenos is akin to being molested by a stunted Piranha who has yet to recover from a major bout of dental surgery. Mind you his use of irony is equisite ....calling other people morons

And your posts all have the structural integrity of a house of cards.

Jenos Ridan wrote:

comic boy wrote:Being attacked by Jenos is akin to being molested by a stunted Piranha who has yet to recover from a major bout of dental surgery. Mind you his use of irony is equisite ....calling other people morons

And your posts all have the structural integrity of a house of cards.

That's what she said.

Away small fish, your gummy insults cannot touch me

Frigidus wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

deronimo wrote:

Iliad wrote:GODWIN"S LAW!!!

I win!! I WIN!!!

I know you're probably just having a bit of fun with Jenos, but Godwin's law was constructed in order to ignore the most obvious example of evil in the world. Many people appeal to the Third Reich as an example or warning. It's such an obvious example that others don't want to acknowledge it so they invoke this farce of Godwin's Law to get around the argument.

Hence why I keep on after the morons who bring this farce up.

OK, let me rephrase Godwin's Law (as it has come to be used). If you allege that the opposition in a debate is like Hitler/the Nazis you have fallen back on something so cliched, so persistently incorrect, so uncreative, that you are deemed to have lost the debate because of poor argument. While the poor argument bit is usually true, the rule is more of a meme than a set law, referred to in jest. I believe the 's might have tipped you off to that.

Quit dodging the main point of the argument: at what point is something wrong? How awful does something have to be before it is unacceptible. I could scour the thesaurus for hours on end to put this in many, many differnent ways but I think simplicity is the name of the game when dealling with pompass hypocrites who thing I'M the drooling retard.







Now that I have that out of my system..........





Answer my bleedin' question: What is the criteria that you use to determine what is correct and incorrect?

comic boy wrote:Away small fish, your gummy insults cannot touch me

"I'm rubber, you're glue" BLAH BLAH BLAH. You are the sort of twit that I'd have socked in the mouth just as soon as glue tumbled out. To which I'd say, "Gee, sure don't seem all that rubbery to me."

Punchdrunk I would say

Hey, what do I know? If my views are not the same (how can they be, everything I've been told says you have no views), then by default I'm the weirdo.

Do I smell hypocrisy? Oh yes, you, yes you can Fridge and DM and all the other "moral relativists" all stink to high heaven of your own self-important hypocrisy! The only thing that would really make me laugh about all this is if this played out like a classic Greek Tragidy, where you all drowned in a quagmire of your own making .

Now that I am done baiting and riling like a bunch of rabid dogs on a steel tether.............

Good Day!

Jenos Ridan wrote:Quit dodging the main point of the argument: at what point is something wrong? How awful does something have to be before it is unacceptible. I could scour the thesaurus for hours on end to put this in many, many differnent ways but I think simplicity is the name of the game when dealling with pompass hypocrites who thing I'M the drooling retard.

I'd say that the point something wrong comes somewhere beyond words personally, but you don't seem to quite agree. <Insert appropriate smiley>

That out of the way, something is wrong when most people say it is, and more often than not that basically comes down to not harming other people. That's pretty much the guideline. If it only affects you, s'all good. Step into someone else's territory and not so much. Even that isn't a solid line though. If you want to definitively know what is just, you're shit out of luck. Morality is surprisingly relative.

Jenos Ridan wrote:"I'm rubber, you're glue" BLAH BLAH BLAH. You are the sort of twit that I'd have socked in the mouth just as soon as glue tumbled out. To which I'd say, "Gee, sure don't seem all that rubbery to me."

YEAH1!!11!!1!!!! LOOK AT MY FUCKING BICEPS MAN!!!! I WOULD HAVE U TOTALLY HARDCORE BEAT TO A MOTHERRFUCKING PULP1!!!!! YEAAAAAHHHH!!!! GO TEAM!!!!

JUST BECAUSE I DON'T HAZ TEH LOGIC DOEN'T MEEN THAT I DON'T WIN TEH THRED BECAUSE I WOULDJUST HAVE LYKE PWNED U BIG FUKING STYLE IN REEL LYFE!!!!112111!!! WHICH IS WINNING!!!111!

Ah yes the 5 stages of regression ;

1) Reckless Outbursts
2) Pointless Argument
3) Denial
4) Anger
5) Curling up in a dark corner in the foetal position

I suppose the last one must be the root of your fear,better hide the guns just in case

Dancing Mustard wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:"I'm rubber, you're glue" BLAH BLAH BLAH. You are the sort of twit that I'd have socked in the mouth just as soon as glue tumbled out. To which I'd say, "Gee, sure don't seem all that rubbery to me."

YEAH1!!11!!1!!!! LOOK AT MY FUCKING BICEPS MAN!!!! I WOULD HAVE U TOTALLY HARDCORE BEAT TO A MOTHERRFUCKING PULP1!!!!! YEAAAAAHHHH!!!! GO TEAM!!!!

JUST BECAUSE I DON'T HAZ TEH LOGIC DOEN'T MEEN THAT I DON'T WIN TEH THRED BECAUSE I WOULDJUST HAVE LYKE PWNED U BIG FUKING STYLE IN REEL LYFE!!!!112111!!! WHICH IS WINNING!!!111!

Wow, just when I though nobody could make JR look like he can anything more than an average I.Q., you let this load of stupid tumble out of your mouth.

Either you didn't get the joke, or you're talking to yourself.

Neither possibility is particularly flattering for you, but thanks for dropping by to share your opinions with a bunch of people who don't care.