Jackson pollock has artworks that cost thousands of dollars to the public. Apparently, there are some people out there who find value to it. Do you know how Pollock makes that art? He takes a load of paint and drunkingly throws it against a pure white canvas. There is as much thought in that as there is in making a child.

Your parents made you. You can be happy about it, you can be upset about it. Grattitude does not reflect your feelings about the situation. Gratittude means that you realize that you did not create yourself and owe your existance to someone else.

Is it ok to turn yourself into a weapon and harm others? If suicide is ok, I don't see whats different about that. After all, its your body, you can do what you want with it.

The only reason why people think murder is wrong is because relgion tells them it is. In religions where murder is not wrong, people murder others for many reasons. And its not even murder that people really find wrong, its murder of innocent people. When you then have to ask what makes someone innocent. So to say that your not going to accept an arguemtn because it stems from 'religion' is in my mind, pure idiocy.

To me, morals are based off of two things. Resepct and Gratitude. Having no respect and having no gratitude is what makes a person immoral.

There's a BIG difference between suicide and murder. Suicide you're killing yourself. It's your body, not theirs. Murder is WAY different. That's me killing someone else. That over steps my personal domain, and messes with another's personal domain.

All I can say is, wow. Thirty one isn't so old Erion!

I don't think I "owe" my existence to anyone else. Otherwise, I owe my existence to everyone else for the development I've had from them.

And...no, Daganev, murder is not wrong just because of religion. Murder is wrong because it ends other people's lives without (usually) their consent. That's not my choice to make. Each person should have control over THEIR life only. Besides, from your argument, parents should be able to murder their children. If they're allowed to control when their child's death is allowed, why not just let them do it themselves if they feel like it?

EDIT: Yeah, 31 is really young, and I think it's a bit odd to have yourself die at or before that age. But, hey, your choice, not mine. *shrug*

Doesn't matter. After 30 is when the bad Crap ( ) starts happening. And I don't really want to feel old. The exception is if they find a way via stemcell research to keep me looking ~20 for a loooong time. Then I'll hang around until I start looking 30.

EDIT: Watch your language. ~Shiri~

EDIT: I beat you to it!

I beat your edit! I added my in.

Pff, fine.

That's just wrong. I'm not religious and I'm not going around killing people. I can't even imagine myself murdering someone.
I don't know where murder of someone no innocent is acceptable, but where I live, you go to jail even when you actually had to kill to survive. Just not for so long as you would if it was not self-defence.

Then again, there's also an issue of policemen shooting bank robbers or soldier killing at war... Oh well.

Ok firstly, I can't put myself in any position other than what I have been able to experience. I can not imagine what its like to be missing a limb, or to be unable to understand a concept my teacher is telling me. However, I have experienced many times where BEFORE The situation arose I had one opinion and WHILE the situation existed I had another.

If I were to accept that someone who is in a bad situation should die, then I would also have to accept that crippled people should die also. For some reason, nobody says that a person born without arms or legs should try to kill themselves, or a person with autism is not worth having around and living.

It is different when you have a machine forcing someone's lungs to move or forcing thier heart to beat, but if all you have to do to keep someone alive is to feed them, well then Feed them. As for the Terri case, her parents were more than willing to accept the full fincial burden of keeping her alive. But thats why this is a new thread, so we can be more general.

I do not think your parents have a right to sell you slavery or to kill you, or even to tell you what job to get. However, they do have a right to ask you to do things, and grattitude and resepct would tell me that unless there is somethign seriously wrong with what they are asking, that you should do it.

Is verbal abuse ok? Because Sucicde is a form of verbal abuse to anyone who cares about you. Its also a form of turning yourself into a weapon and causing harm. Its also a method of escaping justice. Are any of those things ok? I would think they are not.

Your mother could have killed you the second you came out of the womb, she did not. Instead she found a way to provide you with food and clothing and protection to the point that you can now exist as you do. Either on your own, or still with thier support. If giving birth isn't enough, the rest of those things should be.


Imagine visisting someones house as a guest, and then breaking everything they hold dear just because you don't think it feels good to be around it. Is that Moral?

Re: asking parents' permission.

I don't need my parents' permission for anything in life. They were horny, and had sex. I was a consequence, not a goal. Sure, they raised me alright, kept me fed and clothed, and helped me learn stuff: I'm grateful, but I don't -owe- them anything. I am not -required- to treat them as friends - I merely choose to.

And there is something seriously wrong with telling you not to do something as major as that with your own life. Or well, they can tell you, but only in an advisor's capacity. They shouldn't be able to CONTROL something like that, even in a moral sense.

Anyway, I don't think those examples really work Daganev. Autism, no. No limbs, no. No functional brain, so you're basically a living shell? Maybe. Definately if she told you to.

And, no, it's not at all like that. It's like destroying your OWN home, possibly while you have a visitor or something. It's not someone ELSE'S home at all, it's yours.

I say Religion is the reason why murder is not wrong because of History. Look at areas and time periods where rellgion was not playing a part, and where murder is acceptable today.

Roman Gladiator pits, Murder as a form of Entertainment.
Death penalty, Murder as a form of punishment.*
War, Murder as a form of self preservation.
Islam, Murder for the sake of preserving Honour
Babalon, Murder as a form of protecting your property


Society is what gives you the idea of what is right and what is wrong, and more often than not, society is built upon a basic set of religious beliefs. There is no purely Secular society in existance today.


*Death penalty is its own issue, but its a clear case to me of how Religious ideas set what is acceptable and what is not as far as morals go. Modern Secularlists find the death penalty to be terrible, unless ofcourse its your own decision, or something.

Suicide should be punishable. By death.

I mean suicide. Not suicide attempts.

EDIT: I am aware that it is incredibly stupid and doesn't contribute anything to the discussion, either.

Well, universal truth.


It's not like they -should- kill themselves. But who's to say they can't?


You should help your parents because they helped you to grow up, but if you're a bastard and you don't, your call.

So your parents Owe you nothing as well? They should be allowed to drop you on a streat corner and just leave you there? After all, your just an accident and you can control your own life right?

Why do your parents owe you something but you don't owe anything to them?

By bastard you mean immoral right?

The question was about Morals not law.

What were the crusades? An accident?

whats the difference between 'a living shell' and having sever mental retardation? What if you have tourrettes? And if someone is just a living shell, how can they tell you they want to die or not? Again, what you want Now is not always going to be what you want when the situation arises. Life experience should show you that.

Like right now, since I havn't eaten yet, I want to order a Super large pizza, but after 3 slices I'm going to want the rest of my money back. (silly example I know, but use your brain and extrapulate)

Meh, Injustice done in the name of a religion is not the same as the religion itself. Nowhere in the bible or works of christianity does it say to go around killing people to look for a holy relic.

And, for me to mention Christain things would be a huge bias since I'm not very fond of its moral code.

AFterall, I left out the Nazi's din't I?

Also, I think there is a different between events in history, and constants in a society. Germany under Nazi rule was a purely secular society by the way. (i.e the premise of the society and its laws were based purely on secular ideas.)

Well it seems to me more like these religions not only approve murder, but encourage it sometimes. So it shows how religion messes with people's heads. That's partially true that morality came from religion, but I doubt if religions were created only to prevent killing, I think some smart people invented them to have control over population (I can't be sure of course, but I'm agnostic, so...) Now we have laws which prevent abuse of human rights, so religion isn't really needed I think... but I'm not entirely sure on that to be honest. Different people have different opinions on what's right or wrong and it mainly comes from how they were raised.

As for death penalty, I believe it's justified in most severe crimes against humanity, like genocide.