Why Is Inflicting Physical and/or Mental Pain Morally Worse Than Killing People?

That's why you toughed out the appendectomy without Demerol. Better stay out of the rain.

Look Garamet. You asked the question and I gave an honest answer. You then have no right to mock it.

No it's not worse, but it doesn't mean we should do it.

Is Dayton related to the wicked witch of the west or something?

In point of fact, I do.

Well, I just realized that Dayton has accomplished something remarkable: he's got Federal Farmer, Rick Deckard, Garamet, Me, and a bunch of others who can't usually agree on what day of the week it is, largely in agreement on two issues 1) torture is wrong 2) Dayton's gone completely batshit. In addition we've been talking mostly civilly to each other. I can add that to the list of things like the Moon Landing, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the election of a black president that I never would have thought would happen in my lifetime.

You'll never see me advocate torture. The list of things tha Dick Head,I mean RickDeckard posted is just dispicable. I've always hated the CIA, Kennedy should have shit them down when he had the chance, but this really takes the cake.
Edit: I'd like to ad that things aren'tawfulorconstitutiomal, they shouldn't be done no mater what.

Wow, just wow. You obviously have no concept of depression and anxiety. God help your pupils should any of them suffer from either. I can see you being very supportive.

Since when are you a protected species, especially when you yourself have mocked people in this very thread?

Well, @Dayton3 hates Jews, so.....

Jebus, you're all beating your chests that torture is wrong, but that killing people is great fun. Sorry, but get off your moral high horse. It's as mindless as being against "racism", with some random definition of it rattling around in your heads. FDR and Churchill tortured the living shit out of some German soldiers to get critical information. Applying some pain or pressure to find out something to protect people is actually more moral than killing countless men, women, and children because you lack the information that you could have sweated out of somebody.

I have really bad anxiety and I can tell you, it's mentally tortuous.

Trust me, I am no stranger to such things either. It infuriates me that a man in his forties has not concept of mental illness and, worse still, has daily responsibility for the welfare of many teenage children in spite of his ignorance. I find that genuinely scary.

Long story, but start with Post #68 here:

http://wordforge.net/index.php?threads/world-rankings.102279/page-2

He's advocating that other people walk to the grocery store and carry their groceries home regardless of their circumstances. He's challenged to try it himself and, big, strong, healthy football coach that he is, spends the rest of the thread whining about how it's cold, and it's raining, and it's too hard! and hasn't walked further than the carport since.

Liar.

Anxiety is a real issue, especially amongst teenagers, to think that Dayton is either oblivious to it or didn't care is a problem. I would argue that anxiety in adults is worse because they have actual adult problems.

I think the 'greatest hits' thread needs updating...

Of course not. See above re: having higher standards for ourselves than "well, at least we're not as bad as ISIS."

Not long...

@Dayton3
You seem to have gotten distracted from this question, so I'll fe-phrase it. What if the guy in the SUV is an Al-Quaida bomb maker? Would you say that he's no threat to us? What if he were a high ranking leader who plans and coordinates terrorist attacks?

ftfy

This has always been my view. I recall a discussion with co-workers on 9/12, in which I argued that we were going to expand our definition of law enforcement to allow US agents to make extra-territorial arrests. I thought that a reasonable response, but did not see war as a meaningful approach to the problem of international terrorism. I believe I was right then, and the same prescription should apply now. Dayton, of course, wants to kill millions with blunt instruments.

Of course. Kill him.

And what if that same guy is in custody in a CIA run prison and refuses to provide any information despite all efforts at being nice to him?

If he's in custody, then how is he any longer a threat?

In the same vein, I wonder if you redefine paedophilia to mean a liking for rainbows and flowers so that you can rape the children entrusted to your care as well.

He could escape. He could communicate plans to the outside world.

Personally I think it's both. I think it must depend on the nature of the threat. I believe that where possible individuals should be prosecuted in the criminal courts, just like everyone else. Institutions like Gitmo and bullshit labels like "enemy combatants" are not an excuse to get around this. But there are some instances, such as the fight against ISIS, where this is not possible and a military response is the only immediate way of dealing with the threat.

Well, he's already redefined the meaning of spousal abuse, so why not?

I find that very offensive. Something you are saying with no basis whatsoever.

I find your every word in this thread highly offensive, so welcome to the club.