www.ditl.org

Okay, I've made my point about as clear as possible; at this stage you either agree in some fashion, or you think the system of finance and government in place is A-OK or at least "as good as it can be". If you actually still don't understand the point I'm making, I can't help with that. Either way, I don't think there's anything more I can say to get the point across.

I agree that the point of debate is no longer one of which we can change each other's minds; however, you will learn in time - as I have, because it takes us a long time on Earth to figure it out - that someone disagreeing with you does NOT always mean that they "don't get it." It only means that they disagree with you.

Tsukiyumi wrote:What if martin Luther King, jr. had wanted to be a stockbroker, or say, president of the united states? He couldn't. Because he was black in the 1960's. The system had taken that choice from him, and so he spent his life fighting for free will and the right to self-determine. Thanks for pointing out a great example. Purposely making people's choices so much harder as to be highly improbable is still injustice.

I never once said it was justice or easy. I said no one can take your free will unless you let them. If you're going to start acting like a whiny child like the rest of the admins here, please do it with someone who isn't your friend.

It is rather clear to me you aren't so much in the discussion here and simply trolling it now.

I apologize for not having much to say in this, but if someone launched a nuke at DC right now, everyone there would cease to have free will very shortly and there would be nothing they could do about it. Because shortly, they would be dead, and the dead have no will at all (well... depends who you ask I guess...).

People can easily take away your free will. It happens every second of every day when someone kills another. And sometimes no matter how hard they try, they can't stop it. Short of being able to predict the future.

Death isn't a part of free will, its a part of life just as free will is. Killing is an act of will from another, an expression of their free will to take life from others. If you are willing to fight for yourself, you'll find that someone taking your life becomes a lot harder.

Deepcrush wrote:Death isn't a part of free will, its a part of life just as free will is. Killing is an act of will from another, an expression of their free will to take life from others. If you are willing to fight for yourself, you'll find that someone taking your life becomes a lot harder.

Taking a life is easy*. Suicide bombers do it all the time and there isn't a whole lot anyone can do if the bomber has an ounce of brain (fortunately, they usually don't think things through very well).

*Easy from a technical standpoint, not an emotional or psychological one. I emotionally could not take a life other than to protect my own or another, and even then I might hesitate. however I have the know-how to construct methods that would be highly effective and no one could do anything about until after I'm done.

And I never said death was a part of free will. However it does effect it. By killing, free will is being taken from someone (that is, the choice to live or not). And in many situations, there is nothing the victim could do about it without knowing the future.

Free will doesn't end in death, free will is an action and there by and expression of life. Killing someone doesn't take their free will, it just promotes the natural order of things. You will be born, you will live and then you will die. The beginning and the end are always the same and have no free will. Free will is a part of living and is thus only affected by you actions in life.

I guess that's just something we will disagree on, though I see where your coming from. And as that was my only contention point, I shall cease to speak until I see something else.

We come from different ideals so its not surprising that we'd differ on aggressive or passive life views.