Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarnauga
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Yes, because not being charitable IS charitable ! see that man drowning in front of you ? don't save him ! it's gonna teach him a lesson and he'll prolly learn to swim after that experience ! see ? you're actually being GOOD here. (also you save your hard-earned-millions-of-dollar-that-you-inherited-from-daddy because you didn't have to call an ambulance)
This is how you get a presidential candidate who feels perfectly fine not paying taxes, not paying contractors, because see, it's HIS money, if other people are not smart enough to get it from me and not get a better lawyer than i, they're not the smart ones, me me me and all the others can go to hell. That african child dying of aids because his raped mom gave him the virus giving him birth (remember abortion and contraception is evil, jesus told me) could totally make it if he just would work 90 hours a week like real americans chinese do in foxxcon factories building toys for richer people's kids. You too, Dave, you work 3 part time jobs already to support your mother that has dementia and the kid you got with that girl that left you for that asshole ? well it's kinda your fault honestly. but you can be rich too, if you just work a bit more and take a 4th job. What about you Nils ? You studied for 5 years and still can't get a job ? well you didn't study the right thing then ! see you have to mold your life after the market ! the market is the only thing that matters, who cares if you wanted to study philosophy, who the fuck cares about philosophy anyway ? just go be a car salesman ffs. thank god we have freedom in this country where you can do whatever you want !
We may live on the same planet, but we're definitely not part of the same world.
|
lol, this entire post is just silly ^^ It has nothing to do with your world or my world or anyone else's here. No, not being charitable is not actually charitable. Generally speaking charity is a selfish ambition to placate one's own conscience without actually solving the problem. It's a way for people feel good about themselves without doing anything, similar to religion or ideology. As therapy, sure it works, but it is nasty to be perfectly honest.
Ignoring a man drowning is a terrible analogy, because that is a situation is within most people's power to correct and the man's suffering (drowning) is not catching. Ending his suffering only ends it for him. Donating to "charitable" organizations would be akin to dumping a bunch of medium sized playland balls in to the whater to give the man just enough aid to keep him from drowning until he is finally exhausted and does drown.
As for abortion, I've voiced support of it before, but do not discard the objections of those who consider it murder. It does end a life. We've discussed this before with regard to partial birth abortions. If those are acceptable, why not infanticide? Both are equally repugnant practices, but the good that may come of them by ending and preventing suffering outweigh them. I could never consent to either, but I do not delude myself into thinking
either is purely virtuous or in some way not vile. But the so is birthing a child's you cannot care for.
The idea that everyone can be rich is just silly too. Just as is the idea that people somehow deserve awful outcomes because they are not as smart as you. Everyone has the opportunity to do what they will of themselves, but not necessarily the resources to effect the outcome desired. Is it their fault they were born into misery? No. Is it nice to keep them in a perpetual state of misery?