www.ditl.org

Deepcrush wrote:Backpeddal what? I wonder if we are even talking about the same thing. Why is it that you two keep removing MORAL from what I am saying? Do you truly like to cry over something that much? Its like talking to a woman during PMS. The whole selective hearing and what not.

You've only just put moral into it.
You wrote, and still maintain, that the definition of murder is 'a meaningless killing'. Killing for money is not meaningless, so under your definition, it's not murder. If you can't comprehend something so utterly simple as that then you, in all seriousness, need to get back to school.
Your attempt at backpeddaling is by putting 'moral' into the meaning part. Meaningless or meaningful isn't only good things. But now you've just wrote moral in there, you've attempted to make it mean only good. So if something has meaning, then it has a purpose - whether that purpose is good or bad. If something has moral meaning, then it has only a good purpose. You've tried, unsuccesfully, to change what your point is and it really is showing that you know you're wrong but refuse to concede.

Deepcrush wrote: You must really love hearing yourself talk.

And, even though I thought it was impossible, you have even further shown your inability to argue a point. Even an invalid point at that!

Killing for money is meaningless, you can get it elsewhere.
Killing for sport is meaningless, there are other things to do with your time.
Killing in self defense has a meaning, its that or let them kill you.

LUNCH TIME! BE BACK SOON! TAKE CARE NOW, BYE BYE THEN!

Deepcrush wrote:Killing for money is meaningless, you can get it elsewhere.

DING DING DING
So here's the route of the problem. He actually doesn't know what 'meaningless' means. Well, so you know, it means without purpose. Killing for money is meaningful. Just because it's a bad meaning doesn't mean it's meaningless. Killing for money is not without purpose. The very purpose/meaning is to get money. So killing for money has meaning. It is meaningful.
I'm not sure how much more simple I could put it, though I expect even the most simple wording wouldn't allow you to understand it, kid.

Deepcrush wrote:Killing for money is meaningless, you can get it elsewhere.

The word you're looking for is "unnecessary". "Meaningless" refers to an event that has no significance or importance - hardly a definition of murder.

Fair enough then. Lets change "Meaningless" to "Unnecessary". Lets pretend that since I really dont' want to have to edit that much.

Deepcrush wrote:Fair enough then. Lets change "Meaningless" to "Unnecessary". Lets pretend that since I really dont' want to have to edit that much.

Still doesn't work for everything. Murder is not 'an uncessary killing'.
Because accidentally killing someone is unecessary. But it's not murder.

Deepcrush wrote:Fair enough then. Lets change "Meaningless" to "Unnecessary". Lets pretend that since I really dont' want to have to edit that much.

Concession accepted.

DOHHHHHHHHHHHHH! I meant to say "don't"!

Captain Seafort wrote:

Deepcrush wrote:Fair enough then. Lets change "Meaningless" to "Unnecessary". Lets pretend that since I really dont' want to have to edit that much.

Concession accepted.

As long as the point stands, the terms are always open to change for the better.

'Unecessary' only covers the aspect of killing someone to get their money (or similar). It does not cover accidentally killing someone - which is neither meaningful or necessary.

Yeah but thats covered by other matters of law that we could get into.

I love this site. The arguments are so much fun!

You can never perfectly define it.

What if you kill for money so you can spend it to survive?

Killing is almost always wrong but sometimes it can be more justifief than other which is why our legal system has Murder 1, 2 and 3.

Very true.