LogFAQs > #901949351

Aristoph posted...

[character limit]

Literally a massive portion of my post was talking about people being given second chances, rehabilitated, empathized with, and understood then using that information to help others. But that in my opinion, some acts are too heinous to be deserving of that treatment when you commit them, they're not "mistakes" or "faults" they're abhorrent acts that the moment you willingly commit you're immediately putting your cards on the table that you don't belong in society. It was a privilege you had to be a member of it, you abused it by either definitively or potentially ending or ruining an innocent persons life because you wanted to commit an abhorrent act that the moment you commit, you are no longer deserving of that privilege again.

If you murder someone in cold blood because you want to, you're a piece of shit and deserve no empathy.

If you go shoot up a school or something, you're a piece of shit and deserve no empathy.

If you willingly rape someone, you're a piece of shit and deserve no empathy.

If you sexually abuse a child, you're a piece of shit and deserve no empathy.

Along with other things of that nature. Those aren't acts you can just undo, those aren't acts you can just fix, you've burdened someone or potentially multiple people with something they're going to live with for the rest of their lives and potentially take years to overcome or in certain unfortunate cases you end up with suicides, substance abuse, etc. And it's not even generally just the one person you've hurt, it causes a wave of pain for those close with that person as well.

Someone breaks into a house, rapes and murders the resident, you don't think "it was just a mistake! They can change! We should spend years and tons of money to get them back out in the society where they're sure to thrive!"
No, rational people think "lock their ass up and throw away the key" or even just "death penalty"

And no, the answer isn't objectively nobody. There's a clear distinction between insulting users and non users or saying generalized terms like "everyone who likes [thing I don't like] is an idiot" but mods themselves will often insult people. Some celebrity does something stupid, of some news story of someone doing something stupid, or some video of someone doing something stupid, etc. You can say they're an absolute fucking dumbass, that they're a piece of shit, or whatever along those lines applies to that specific thing.

I can say that Adolf Hitler was subhuman garbage without a mod telling me "denouncing Hitler as not human is offensive."

I can say that the everyone in ISIS, or any other objectively terrible groups, are complete pieces of shit without a mod telling me "denouncing all ISIS members of pieces of shit is offensive."

I can say to some video of someone doing something ridiculously stupid that they and anyone who attempts anything like it are absolute dumbasses without a mod saying "denouncing all people who [insert some moronic dangerous thing someone did for internet views] as dumbasses is offensive."

The line comes in if I said "[user] is a subhuman, piece of shit, dumbass" or did it for a group of people like "everyone who likes [some game or something] is a subhuman, piece of shit, dumbass."

Yet apparently intentional, guilty, cold blooded murderers and rapists became a protected class? That's just a complete joke.

And the "mercy killing" part was followed by me elaborating on what I meant by that saying rational people who actually belong in society wouldn't want to live with the mind of someone who was compelled to murder or rape an innocent person or child. And I followed that up by saying if I was ever feeling compelled to molest a child, I'd sooner take a gun to myself than do it. What is there to disagree with? Do you want to live with the mind of a child rapist?
---

Get wet.
http://i.imgtc.com/2q3z3TmhFO.jpg