You also need to look at it through the proper context. Hell iron was barely figured out during bible times. Slavery was ok because that's how you got big projects done. The industrial revolution made slavery obsolete.
I remember that time you said something else almost that bad and then Clunk and I started arguing about it before Clunk was like, paraphrased, "Oh shit my bad. I read that wrong in a hurry. He totally DID say that shit. What the fuck."
It was such a weird moment of solidarity because Clunk and I never agree about shit. You know you said some fucked up shit when both of us are looking at it like that.
I don't think it's the fact that these people think these things that surprises me anymore. We all know how they think.
It's just that they usually jump through hoops to twist things and beat around the bush when it comes to directly owning some of it so it's still a little surprising in those rarer moments when they drop something basically like, "I am both sexist and homophobic. I hope this clears things up" with zero fucks given.
By the way, an actual one from a certain someone on here the other day: "Consent is way overrated."
I think you should read it as if he added the word "considered". Slavery was considered okay, so it is foolish to call the people at the time immoral for their slavery, since they did not know it was not acceptable.
On an unrelated note, I dislike your usage of curses in your paraphrase. I do not curse and never will. It was more like, "I just realized that I misread it and will not continue making my argument."
I don't think the Bible folk were "considering" _anything_ only just over 200 years ago when the industrial revolution _finally_ made slavery unacceptable, you know, only because we have really easy alternatives. Otherwise... ehhhh... kinda need slavery because it's going to be such a drag trying to get big shit done without it.
No. That's a LloydAsher perspective right there. And fuck slavery.
And perspective doesn't matter anyway. Imagine I'm talking about child killer Gacy:
"I think you've really gotta look at it in the right context. Gacy was REALLY tryna torture and rape those kids dressed as a clown. He was BIG horny. In Gacy's basement, killing those kids was okay."
See how it doesn't help?
As for the cursing, relax. That was part of the joke. Everyone knows you think you would spontaneously combust if you cursed like that.
Never got the whole cursing thing. Feces. Fine to say. Shit. Cursing. Means the exact same thing. How did we decide to demonize one set of weird noises we make with our mouths versus another set? It's actually something so weird that science has actually looked into it. We just take it for granted and never give much thought to how completely absurd it is that we do this.
*Comes back from future to edit comment*
Yeah he just confirmed that it in fact was okay. Not considered okay. It was okay.
We Catholics have this concept in sin that I'll call "required knowledge". If you do not know that what you're doing is evil, it is not considered a sin until you learn that it is evil. Gacy knew that what he was doing was evil (I assume), while the people practicing slavery did not know that what they were doing was evil, assuming that it is evil. So, at the time, in a way, it less not okay, since they did not know that it is not okay.
It all has to do with what amount of the truth a certain person has been suggested of at any given time. Assuming that the truth is that slavery is immoral, and that many people back then never even had it suggested to them that slavery is immoral, then their acts were less immoral. Don't get me wrong, it doesn't make their actions any less evil, but it makes their intentions less evil, making the act of them holding slaves less evil (an act is made up of action and intention). It would bring a sin (intentional rejection of truth) down to a fault (unintentional rejection of truth).
About the cursing, I personally just far prefer using more formal words to pointlessly informal words like curses.
Well we atheists have a concept in morality. I'll call it, "Something is terribly wrong with you if you can't intuitively _feel_ what is right and wrong."
Yeah WAS ok. Every damn civilization on the planet that was somewhat successful (until fairly recently) used slavery. Hell it seems to be apart of our nature like war.
Yeah slavery is bad now since we have the ability to mass produce things with less labor as well as owning someone being fucked up. Its inhuman but also obsolete production wise.
What the hell were kings and chiefs supposed to do with prisoners of war? Just let them go? They could regroup and rebel. Killing most of them was a common solution. Slavery was like a 3rd choice. Given the circumstances of life back then with an average life expectancy of 40. Doing manual stuff is hard, without machines it was even more intensive. The only power people could readily control was animal and human power and cows dont have hands.
That being said modern day slavery is completely abhorrent and we should kill the traffickers.
Conclusion: fucked up but necessary for progression and expansion, later on it was to secure better production prices thus profit, then it became obsolete.
Just out of curiosity. Would you say that every luxury you own was not a result of modern day slavery/child labour? If not, how does your view on this co-exist with your position here?
Ok you are a Pharoah and you need to move ten ton stone slabs 50 miles through the desert with practically zero tools. How the hell are you going to do it?
I don't know if you've worded this correctly but I'm curious.
Do you believe that because people were such a greater resource in history that it justified their enslavement to meet the means of production for the sake of progress.
--Or--
Are you saying that due to the circumstance of history it was "ok" in the minds of the people at such times but would not be ok today by your own moral standard to sacrifice freedom for progress even if we were majorly set back and couldn't rely on what you believe made slavery obsolete?
You know, I thought about it and you're right. I really do absolutely need to get these narcissistic monuments to myself built. I probably wouldnt utterly violate humans rights if there were some sweet tech that worked better anyway, but there's not, so I'll just utterly violate human rights. This is okay.
Amazing response.
You know, I used to laugh at your profile going on about "sociopathic reasoning" because you're so rarely logical and it was clear what you really meant was "logical at all cost" rather than "sociopathic" since you had just called yourself a nice guy. But sociopathic and logical are not synonymous at all and sociopathic reasoning can just as often be illogical. Right now I'm amused at the fact that we just take it as is. You're spewing shit that's both illogical and certainly sociopathic.
In fact it's actually making me laugh aloud right now that your sociopathy (and perhaps unwarranted narcissism) is so much higher than your logic that you would even use _THIS_ as your example without the possibility of just _NOT_ making the narcissistic love-me monuments even so much as crossing your mind. It's like a given that it must be done for you.
Anyway I gotta go murder a bunch of people at a heavily guarded bank I'm robbing so I can buy myself a sick new whip and bachelor pad. I mean obviously I'd prefer they just hand me the money or there were some kind of tech that made robbing banks obsolete but there's not. Lot of people are going to have to die. Is what it is.
Okay put yourself in my shoes bro. I already have a really nice house, vacation house, and multiple vehicles. We're really trying to get some new shit for vanity's sake though and we've recently overinvested too much to do this right now. We have to rob this bank bro. How are you doing it?
why are you atheist? why are you theist?
← View full post
i dont like assholes who study ancient bullshit tellin me what to do
--
S0UNDS_WEIRD
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
3
3
-
LloydAsher
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
But bruh, the Bible though. Let me just quote the book you don't believe the contents of to show you where it says believe it.
Bullshittery 1:14
And then the Lord said, "Behold. Believe this wild shit or fucking BURN."
You also need to look at it through the proper context. Hell iron was barely figured out during bible times. Slavery was ok because that's how you got big projects done. The industrial revolution made slavery obsolete.
--
S0UNDS_WEIRD
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
-
donteatstuffoffthesidewalk
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
"Slavery was ok" - LloydAsher
What. The. Actual. Fuck.
I remember that time you said something else almost that bad and then Clunk and I started arguing about it before Clunk was like, paraphrased, "Oh shit my bad. I read that wrong in a hurry. He totally DID say that shit. What the fuck."
It was such a weird moment of solidarity because Clunk and I never agree about shit. You know you said some fucked up shit when both of us are looking at it like that.
--
charli.m
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
3
3
-
Clunk42
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
LloydAsher
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-2
-2
Nothing that dumpster fire says surprises me anymore.
Horrified and disgusted, of course. But not surprised.
He's a self professed nice person. Nuf said.
--
S0UNDS_WEIRD
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
I don't think it's the fact that these people think these things that surprises me anymore. We all know how they think.
It's just that they usually jump through hoops to twist things and beat around the bush when it comes to directly owning some of it so it's still a little surprising in those rarer moments when they drop something basically like, "I am both sexist and homophobic. I hope this clears things up" with zero fucks given.
By the way, an actual one from a certain someone on here the other day: "Consent is way overrated."
--
charli.m
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Yeah...that one was nothing new. Not remotely. That person has said worse and continues to do so.
I think you should read it as if he added the word "considered". Slavery was considered okay, so it is foolish to call the people at the time immoral for their slavery, since they did not know it was not acceptable.
On an unrelated note, I dislike your usage of curses in your paraphrase. I do not curse and never will. It was more like, "I just realized that I misread it and will not continue making my argument."
--
S0UNDS_WEIRD
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I don't think the Bible folk were "considering" _anything_ only just over 200 years ago when the industrial revolution _finally_ made slavery unacceptable, you know, only because we have really easy alternatives. Otherwise... ehhhh... kinda need slavery because it's going to be such a drag trying to get big shit done without it.
No. That's a LloydAsher perspective right there. And fuck slavery.
And perspective doesn't matter anyway. Imagine I'm talking about child killer Gacy:
"I think you've really gotta look at it in the right context. Gacy was REALLY tryna torture and rape those kids dressed as a clown. He was BIG horny. In Gacy's basement, killing those kids was okay."
See how it doesn't help?
As for the cursing, relax. That was part of the joke. Everyone knows you think you would spontaneously combust if you cursed like that.
Never got the whole cursing thing. Feces. Fine to say. Shit. Cursing. Means the exact same thing. How did we decide to demonize one set of weird noises we make with our mouths versus another set? It's actually something so weird that science has actually looked into it. We just take it for granted and never give much thought to how completely absurd it is that we do this.
*Comes back from future to edit comment*
Yeah he just confirmed that it in fact was okay. Not considered okay. It was okay.
--
Clunk42
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
We Catholics have this concept in sin that I'll call "required knowledge". If you do not know that what you're doing is evil, it is not considered a sin until you learn that it is evil. Gacy knew that what he was doing was evil (I assume), while the people practicing slavery did not know that what they were doing was evil, assuming that it is evil. So, at the time, in a way, it less not okay, since they did not know that it is not okay.
It all has to do with what amount of the truth a certain person has been suggested of at any given time. Assuming that the truth is that slavery is immoral, and that many people back then never even had it suggested to them that slavery is immoral, then their acts were less immoral. Don't get me wrong, it doesn't make their actions any less evil, but it makes their intentions less evil, making the act of them holding slaves less evil (an act is made up of action and intention). It would bring a sin (intentional rejection of truth) down to a fault (unintentional rejection of truth).
About the cursing, I personally just far prefer using more formal words to pointlessly informal words like curses.
--
S0UNDS_WEIRD
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
Well we atheists have a concept in morality. I'll call it, "Something is terribly wrong with you if you can't intuitively _feel_ what is right and wrong."
Yeah WAS ok. Every damn civilization on the planet that was somewhat successful (until fairly recently) used slavery. Hell it seems to be apart of our nature like war.
Yeah slavery is bad now since we have the ability to mass produce things with less labor as well as owning someone being fucked up. Its inhuman but also obsolete production wise.
What the hell were kings and chiefs supposed to do with prisoners of war? Just let them go? They could regroup and rebel. Killing most of them was a common solution. Slavery was like a 3rd choice. Given the circumstances of life back then with an average life expectancy of 40. Doing manual stuff is hard, without machines it was even more intensive. The only power people could readily control was animal and human power and cows dont have hands.
That being said modern day slavery is completely abhorrent and we should kill the traffickers.
Conclusion: fucked up but necessary for progression and expansion, later on it was to secure better production prices thus profit, then it became obsolete.
--
S0UNDS_WEIRD
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Hole. Lee. Shit.
This just in: Slavery was okay confirmed.
--
[Old Memory]
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
LloydAsher
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Just out of curiosity. Would you say that every luxury you own was not a result of modern day slavery/child labour? If not, how does your view on this co-exist with your position here?
Genuine question.
Ok you are a Pharoah and you need to move ten ton stone slabs 50 miles through the desert with practically zero tools. How the hell are you going to do it?
--
[Old Memory]
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
-
S0UNDS_WEIRD
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
I don't know if you've worded this correctly but I'm curious.
Do you believe that because people were such a greater resource in history that it justified their enslavement to meet the means of production for the sake of progress.
--Or--
Are you saying that due to the circumstance of history it was "ok" in the minds of the people at such times but would not be ok today by your own moral standard to sacrifice freedom for progress even if we were majorly set back and couldn't rely on what you believe made slavery obsolete?
You know, I thought about it and you're right. I really do absolutely need to get these narcissistic monuments to myself built. I probably wouldnt utterly violate humans rights if there were some sweet tech that worked better anyway, but there's not, so I'll just utterly violate human rights. This is okay.
Amazing response.
You know, I used to laugh at your profile going on about "sociopathic reasoning" because you're so rarely logical and it was clear what you really meant was "logical at all cost" rather than "sociopathic" since you had just called yourself a nice guy. But sociopathic and logical are not synonymous at all and sociopathic reasoning can just as often be illogical. Right now I'm amused at the fact that we just take it as is. You're spewing shit that's both illogical and certainly sociopathic.
In fact it's actually making me laugh aloud right now that your sociopathy (and perhaps unwarranted narcissism) is so much higher than your logic that you would even use _THIS_ as your example without the possibility of just _NOT_ making the narcissistic love-me monuments even so much as crossing your mind. It's like a given that it must be done for you.
Anyway I gotta go murder a bunch of people at a heavily guarded bank I'm robbing so I can buy myself a sick new whip and bachelor pad. I mean obviously I'd prefer they just hand me the money or there were some kind of tech that made robbing banks obsolete but there's not. Lot of people are going to have to die. Is what it is.
Okay put yourself in my shoes bro. I already have a really nice house, vacation house, and multiple vehicles. We're really trying to get some new shit for vanity's sake though and we've recently overinvested too much to do this right now. We have to rob this bank bro. How are you doing it?
ancient bullshit belongs in the past