Selflessness

[Mekk]

How much of yourself would you sacrifice for someone else?

If you were offered the chance to sacrifice your life for the benefit of the whole human race, would you do it? If it cured cancer, AIDS, stupidity? If it prevented a comet from destroying Earth?

What if nobody else knew about it? I know a lot of people would sacrifice themselves for eternal glory, but would you do it if you were the only person that knew you were saving the world?

Our inherent nature is to be selfish. Our biological bodies are designed that way so that we may survive. Does it matter then how selfish we are?

Tell me.

[Finn]

What the fuck is wrong with this place?

[Sniper]

What the fuck is wrong with this place?

Ahh Finn, we missed you

[riffer]

The world - or KB?

Either way, this could be a loooooong discussion. :yes:

[Hitcher]

Selfishness is only acceptable as long as this behaviour doesn't impinge on the rights and wellbeing of others.

Who would I "sacrifice" myself for, in whole or in part? Only for my family and those I love or respect. Anything more than this would be pure oversight on my part.

[Finn]

The world - or KB?

The problem with the world is religion and dictators. I was referring to posts like this on KB.

[Mekk]

The world - or KB?

Either way, this could be a loooooong discussion. :yes:

Wtf, the world!

KB isn't real. Shhhh.

[Jantar]

For someone I loved, for my country, or for the whole human race? - yes.

To cure a disease? - No.

Everyone must die of something, so finding a cure for a disease just means that person will die of something else.

Consider the situation that man has got so smart that there are only three fatla diseases left: Lets say Heart disease, Aids and toenail cancer, and that 33.33% of the population die of each. Dr Joe discovers an amazing drug that finally cures the last remaining cancer - no more toenail cancer. Now we find that 50% of the population die of Aids and 50% die of heart disese. Dr Joe's amazing drug has just caused a 50% increase in heart disease.

[Mekk]

For someone I loved, for my country, or for the whole human race? - yes.

Even if it was seen by the rest of the world as a meaningless suicide?

[Karma]

What the fuck is wrong with this place?

+1 :blink:

[Hitcher]

there are only three fatla diseases left

Caused by riding sprotsbikes, scroters, or crusiers? Or spending too much time in one's evel gargre?

And I share your fascination for bogus statistics. Like LTNZ's latest campaign that alleges that 50% of road accidents occur on corners. Which means that... 50% of road accidents must occur on straights! Where is the "hard-hitting" campaign and freshly-trashed Falcon as a result of driver error on a straight stretch of road? Why do these "people" have to make shit up to make a point? It does their credibility no favours.

[klingon]

I got cancer a while ago and one of the most touching things anybody said to me was when my Dad said "I wish I could have it instead of you." The fact that he was prepared to put my life ahead of his own was a lovely gesture.

Anyway I had an op and they removed my cancer so I'm fine now. My darling Dad died last month (of cancer).

__________________________

To answer your question, I would risk my life for someone I love. I would take progressively smaller and smaller risks for people I had less empathy with.

[NighthawkNZ]

Even if it was seen by the rest of the world as a meaningless suicide?

Terrorist or freedom fighter, martyrs or killer, fighting or sucide, meaningless wars through out the ages, the list goes on...

What you think is doing good is thought totally different by someone on the other side of the world anyway... by its what you believe is good and believe should be fighting for or dying...

[Mekk]

Terrorist or freedom fighter, martyrs or killer, fighting or sucide, meaningless wars through out the ages, the list goes on...

Yeah, ok I need to clarify.

The suicide notion was really more to separate the glory from the act. As mentioned in the first post, I know people who would sacrifice themselves knowing that sacrifice for others is seen as something admirable and therefore doing it for that reason. In essence doing it more for themselves.

I mean a sacrifice for something that would benefit the whole race, eg averting a meteorite from destroying Earth.

The focus shouldn't be on the example but the principle, if you get me.

[Mekk]

I got cancer a while ago and one of the most touching things anybody said to me was when my Dad said "I wish I could have it instead of you." The fact that he was prepared to put my life ahead of his own was a lovely gesture.

Anyway I had an op and they removed my cancer so I'm fine now. My darling Dad died last month (of cancer).

Condolences, sorry to hear.



__________________________

To answer your question, I would risk my life for someone I love. I would take progressively smaller and smaller risks for people I had less empathy with.

Risk or sacrifice?

[Lias]

I'd be a suicide bomber under the right conditions.

I wouldnt blow myself up to kill a few dozen or a few hundred people, but if I could take out a shitload more in one pop (gimme a Tsar Bomba!) I'd probably do it :-)

Dirka dirka jihad kaboom!

[Sanx]

If I could be certain that my 'sacrifice' would be 100% guaranteed of achieving its goal, I'd do it for one thing only; to ensure that the world's population saw religion as the poisonous delusional dangerous virus that it is.

[imdying]

Anything for my closest friends... the rest of you fags can eat a dick :P

[Steam]

Selflessness... I dunno.

What do I get out of it?

[cowboyz]

If I sacrificed myself the world would lose the one and only hero everyone should aspire to be so in the total interest of unselfishness I would let the guy next to me do it.

[Grahameeboy]

If I could be certain that my 'sacrifice' would be 100% guaranteed of achieving its goal, I'd do it for one thing only; to ensure that the world's population saw religion as the poisonous delusional dangerous virus that it is.

A bit harsh but sadly true in some cases but hey what about delusional and dangerous atheists??

[Steam]

A bit harsh but sadly true in some cases but hey what about delusional and dangerous atheists??

Name some?

[Sanx]

A bit harsh but sadly true in some cases but hey what about delusional and dangerous atheists??

To paraphrase Terry Pratchett: A dangerous and deluded atheist despot might still be a dangerous and deluded despot, but at least he doesn't claim that he's killing everyone in god's name.

[Grahameeboy]

Name some?

Name some deselusional and dangerous Christians first................

[Sanx]

Name some?

Mao Tse Tung, Stalin, Pol Pot - those do for starters?

[Sanx]

Name some deselusional and dangerous Christians first................

Hmm - where should I start. George W Bush, Tony Blair, Pope Benedict XVI, the f'ing arsehole of a Cardinal I quoted above, the Bishop of Nairobi I quoted above, the 4400ish Catholic priests against whom accusations of child sex abuse have been made.
As for the history: Hitler's always a good one.

[Grahameeboy]

To paraphrase Terry Pratchett: A dangerous and deluded atheist despot might still be a dangerous and deluded despot, but at least he doesn't claim that he's killing everyone in god's name.

I agree...Bush is a prime example of this but he is not an authentic Christian in my eyes cause no one in my Church kills in gods name............so if an Atheist kills what is their excuse......??

[Edbear]

eg averting a meteorite from destroying Earth


MMmmm! Didn't Bruce Willis do that already...?

[Grahameeboy]

Hmm - where should I start. George W Bush, Tony Blair, Pope Benedict XVI, the f'ing arsehole of a Cardinal I quoted above, the Bishop of Nairobi I quoted above, the 4400ish Catholic priests against whom accusations of child sex abuse have been made.
As for the history: Hitler's always a good one.

Well Bush and Blair are not authentic Christians and agree the rest so that is 4406 so far...............always bad eggs and must admit I have issues with Catholicism at times but at end of day they will have to answer......

[Grahameeboy]

Mao Tse Tung, Stalin, Pol Pot - those do for starters?

Stalin was actually a closet Atheist but later made his peace with God bringing back Priests.....the others were not Christians.....

[Sanx]

Well Bush and Blair are not authentic Christians and agree the rest so that is 4406 so far...............always bad eggs and must admit I have issues with Catholicism at times...

Unfortunately, that's the excuse given for anyone who commits atrocities under the guise of religion, whether it's Catholics versus Protestants in Northern Ireland or Glasgow, Muslims versus Christians in Kosovo, Muslims vs animists in Darfur, Muslims versus Jews in Israel, Shia versus Sunni in Iraq, Muslims versus Hindus in Kashmir, Hindus versus Buddhists in Sri Lanka, etc. etc. The same excuse every time: oh, they're not real Jews / Christians / Muslims / Hindus / Buddhists *delete as appropriate.

But adding to the list of dangerous Christians of the protestant variety: Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell in the USA, who both announced within hours of 9/11 that the immolation of 3000+ people was divine judgement on a society that tolerated homosexuality and abortion. You can also add the Westboro Baptist Church (http://www.godhatesfags.com/main/index.html) (NSFW) and the anti-abortion groups in the US who have killed and maimed staff and clients of clinics that perform abortion. And then you've got the Mormons, the more extreme of whom have well documented polygamist and paedophilic tendencies...


but at end of day they will have to answer......

Or not, as I believe. The people to whom they should be answering are the people they abused or the families of those they've killed. Again, it's much easier for their religious critics (and them themselves) to say that they're ultimately answerable to god, as no-one can check god's paper trail and see whether they did indeed receive a fitting punishment.


I agree...Bush is a prime example of this but he is not an authentic Christian in my eyes cause no one in my Church kills in gods name............so if an Atheist kills what is their excuse......??

There is no excuse. But coming up with no valid excuse is a hell of a lot better than trying to say one's imaginary friend told them to do it.


Stalin was actually a closet Atheist but later made his peace with God bringing back Priests.....the others were not Christians.....

I was naming atheists, not Christians. I never said that atheists were inherently less evil or immoral.

[young1]

Caused by riding sprotsbikes, scroters, or crusiers? Or spending too much time in one's evel gargre?

And I share your fascination for bogus statistics. Like LTNZ's latest campaign that alleges that 50% of road accidents occur on corners. Which means that... 50% of road accidents must occur on straights! Where is the "hard-hitting" campaign and freshly-trashed Falcon as a result of driver error on a straight stretch of road? Why do these "people" have to make shit up to make a point? It does their credibility no favours.


They should have used a Holden in that advert, it wouldnt have crashed (I bet Ford arent happy with it!!)

[Grahameeboy]

Unfortunately, that's the excuse given for anyone who commits atrocities under the guise of religion, whether it's Catholics versus Protestants in Northern Ireland or Glasgow, Muslims versus Christians in Kosovo, Muslims vs animists in Darfur, Muslims versus Jews in Israel, Shia versus Sunni in Iraq, Muslims versus Hindus in Kashmir, Hindus versus Buddhists in Sri Lanka, etc. etc. The same excuse every time: oh, they're not real Jews / Christians / Muslims / Hindus / Buddhists *delete as appropriate.

But adding to the list of dangerous Christians of the protestant variety: Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell in the USA, who both announced within hours of 9/11 that the immolation of 3000+ people was divine judgement on a society that tolerated homosexuality and abortion. You can also add the Westboro Baptist Church (http://www.godhatesfags.com/main/index.html) (NSFW) and the anti-abortion groups in the US who have killed and maimed staff and clients of clinics that perform abortion. And then you've got the Mormons, the more extreme of whom have well documented polygamist and paedophilic tendencies...



Or not, as I believe. The people to whom they should be answering are the people they abused or the families of those they've killed. Again, it's much easier for their religious critics (and them themselves) to say that they're ultimately answerable to god, as no-one can check god's paper trail and see whether they did indeed receive a fitting punishment.



There is no excuse. But coming up with no valid excuse is a hell of a lot better than trying to say one's imaginary friend told them to do it.



I was naming atheists, not Christians. I never said that atheists were inherently less evil or immoral.


Sorry I misread...agree the rest of what you say.......anyway, God uses e-mail these days and just deletes for security..............

[Finn]

anyway, God uses e-mail these days

That explains all the fucken spam.

[mstriumph]

......
KB isn't real. Shhhh.

SMILE when you say that, pardner!! :laugh:

[Grahameeboy]

That explains all the fucken spam.

Well remember he is omnipresent...............

[riffer]

That explains all the fucken spam.

Well remember he is omnipresent...............

Why don't you two get a room in Religious Ravings? (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=3026):wacko:

[Mekk]

MMmmm! Didn't Bruce Willis do that already...?

Very true!

Bruce doesn't post here though. 'shame really. :/


SMILE when you say that, pardner!!

:D