 | | Re: Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
Hi Rick This makes a change from Lar & Scott's continual bickering. ;) My opinions: 1. Whatever decision you make should be in complete agreement with your GF & should have the effect of improving your relationship. Think about what you want & why (...) (23 years ago, 3-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | No evil people
|
|
(...) Care to elaborate on that? I've said in the past that most people are good, but I do acknowledge that there may be some that are not. It sounds like you think that no matter how much evil a person does, no matter how remorseless their actions, (...) (23 years ago, 3-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No evil people
|
|
Larry Pieniazek <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GM853y.CJE@lugnet.com... (...) good, (...) you (...) remorseless (...) Yes thanks. I do not deny the existence of evil. IMO evil is a description of an action. I believe there are (...) (23 years ago, 3-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No evil people
|
|
(...) I think that there ARE evil people. Here are a few candidates for you to consider: Pol Pot. Joseph McCarthy. Joseph Stalin. Jeffrey Dahmer. (that last one, some will argue is a mentally ill person, but I'm not sure one way or the other... it's (...) (23 years ago, 3-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No evil people
|
|
Larry Pieniazek <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GM87Jw.Iry@lugnet.com... (...) IMO all those people performed evil acts. How do you define an 'evil person'? How do you define evil? Can someone perform evil acts & not be an evil (...) (23 years ago, 3-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No evil people
|
|
(...) Candidate definition: Someone who consistently performs evil acts, knowing that under objective morality they are evil. (...) Well, I guess I'd want to hear your definition, since you presumably have one since you agreed with me on the (...) (23 years ago, 3-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
