Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 5/21/12 08:24 PM, AnonymousOfCali wrote:

Quit putting words in my mouth dolt. I am saying killing is subjective. You are the one saying killing is wrong. Welcome to Insanctuary's delusion

Saying killing is subjective is implying that you think killing can be validated which is implying that you can take advantage of other people's lives for personal pseudo gains which then implies that you know the gain/loss.

Welcome to Anon's denial of his backwards logic.

At 5/21/12 07:59 PM, AnonymousOfCali wrote:

At 5/21/12 07:52 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

Provide an argument.

We give words meaning, so they have a meaning.

No. The words are only abstratc models. Words do not actually exist. We communicate through shapes and designs. Not words. Words are used as blueprints for our mind.

The words do not mean something. We only apply meaning through an abstract medium for communication.

So they have meaning

No. They do not. We only apply meaning. That does not give it meaning.

The losses are alot more real than stealing pseudo value.

Again with you thinking you know how everyone feels and how gain/loss is for them

Again you being hypocrite and doing the playing the antithesis of my position while telling me I can't do 'this' when you are doing the antithesis version of it. Example, you say I act like I know what everyone feels in regard to gain/loss. While you are going off the deep end and attempting to validate that killing is fine which is implying that you know what they feel in regard to gain/loss. Welcome to Anon's backwards logic.

Whether or not you convince yourself of that. You are blinded by the depth of your own rabbit hole. You are damaging people for pseudo gain. There is no excuse for it. There is no special light to see it under. All you are doing it attempting to rationalize your irrationality.

Narcissism is scary. You truly believe you know how people work. Imagine how shitty the world would be if everyone was like you.

Of course I know how people work. I'm the one who has empathy. I'm the one who values the lives of human beings.

Maschists have conflicts that are objective. They like pain for an underlying reason. It is best to consult it rather than encourage it.

who are you to say whats going on in their head? You are an idiot. I wouldn't take anything you say seriously.

The actions they permit to. Their actions speak its own native tongue. As I've said before, I can read people because I question the human mind. I ask 'Why'. I diligently piece together motives to connect connect the dots. I know how to dismantle and build a human being. You can scoff at me all you may want. It doesn't deem me any less legitimate. It only shows that your ego can not handle the mere fact that I understand life on a much greater level than you could ever imagine the way you go about things currently...

There is no good and bad. There is an objective nature to the external models of our world. The pain you inflict on people are objective. Your actions can be as subjective as you wish it to be; you will always inflict suffering and pain unto another.

Masochists.

Masochists are no different than any other person with anti-social behaviors. It is always an underlying conflict. Which is exactly the point you do not want to admit to. You know that your psychopathy is also the result of having psychological conflicts.

No.

But all you do is post

Post truth and questions people can not challenge.

"I know what people feel my views are objective because I am so full of myself I think I speak for the world and humanity"

Provide an argument. Do not accuse me of which you can not validate.

God complex much?

I'm not the one who is arguing if killing is subjective.

At 5/21/12 07:51 PM, HeavenDuff wrote:

At 5/21/12 06:37 PM, Insanctuary wrote: The thing Hobbes forgot, via my own ideological perspective, is that these two men are NOT fishing for their best interest, but much rather, they are fishing to compensate for what they lack in a psychological; abstract way. They are reaching for the top because the atmosphere of winning tends to fill in their god-shaped hole. They probably lost when they were younger, and they did not take it lightly, so this is their compensation to redeem themselves. If you disagree with this, do let me know.

More like fishing for their own interest if you ask me. What I meant is that in the natural state to which Hobbes often refers, both man would be trying their best to survive, as opposed to living in a society in which they should try to consider the fact that working for their greater good may imply respecting other's interests. When you live in a society, respecting the rules that should in the ideal situation, be applied evenly to everyone... while it may affect your own "liberty", the sacrifice you may make will come out as plus for you. Security is one of the best example when it comes to Hobbes and even for this specific example. Knowing you will not get killed when you go to sleep is a big plus :)

Empathic awareness is a dying virtue; not morally; but sensibly. I understand that we are all complimenting each other in this world. We live for each other. That is why I do not sought for pseudo gains. I sought for information and life in its unadulterated sense. Being wise and aware is the very art of living. Not fretting for pseudo values. Everything is life. The fundamental and most frivolous of life's aspects are the most powerfulest force in human history.

If I introduced this "fight for survival" concept, it's not because I live by it, but rather because our societies seems to. But the thruth is that even if you fight to survive, you shouldn't fight against your society, for it will be costy in the long term. Society should in the ideal of Hobbes, be a place where everybodies search for a better life would give everybody a better life.

I call this act Survival 2.0. We are not surviving for our very lives any more, as if we were in a wild jungle filled with hungry animals. Our lives today are monopolized, and turned into a mechanical trance of nothingness and stale being. Our lives have price tags and values now. This reality is a joke.

If we stick to the example of the actual discussion.... Killing someone would be one of the most immoral thing then. For it would sacrifice your own search for a better life and ruin everybody else's safety and own search of a better life and instigate a situation of confrontation, war and death.

Yes. Killing would destroy everything that makes you 'you'. Would the child you ocne were want to commit such an act? Never. The child version of ourselves was innocent and loving. We try to restrict children and make them look less important than adults; but really, there are alot of lessons you can learn from a child.

Otherwise I don't see how our views are opposing. Explain me if you see something wrong in what I said.

No, no. Our views are not opposing, but much rather displaying themselves through different angles. You elaborated a philosophy of Hobbes', and I elaborated a different angle of his philosophy while still staying in agreement with you.

People do not work that way though. People are complicated entanglements of abstract conflict. We know that this god-shaped hole is never satisfied; but we only continue feeding it day by day.

I tend to agree with you on this though. Freud introduced to the world of psychology the idea that there was a lot that we couldn't control in our own world and even in our own brain. Hobbes argument is based on a very logical, rational and intelligent process, while Freud demonstrate that humans often live out of logical and rational worlds.

We can discipline our mind and body. We are all Gods unto ourselves and pawns unto others that can become their own Gods and pawns to us. It is the perfect balance. God/Pawn and Pawn/God

What do you think ?

I think that you should read Thomas Paine's works too. Thomas Paine > Hobbes

IMO - although, I do respect that all ideas should be taken individually. So yes, Hobbes and thomas Paine can both have good ideas and bad ideas. I just prefer the bigger piecture of Thomas Paine's ideology over Hobbes rather govermental and systematical philosophies.

At 5/21/12 07:40 PM, AnonymousOfCali wrote:

At 5/21/12 07:35 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

Words mean nothing, actually.

retard

Provide an argument.

We only give them meaning to examplify the abstract reflection of our mind's intricate system.

so basically what you're saying is they mean something?

The words do not mean something. We only apply meaning through an abstract medium for communication.

It doesn't matter whether or not you see the beauty as ugly or vice versa. It does not change the objective - in that you are causing the victim pain and suffering for your own illusionary gain.

I'm pretty sure if I kill and steal from someone the gains are very real.

The losses are alot more real than stealing pseudo value.

Can you really validate the objective premise with your interpersonal value?

their is no objective premise no matter how many times you tell me you hear voices in your head and you look through other people minds

Whether or not you convince yourself of that. You are blinded by the depth of your own rabbit hole. You are damaging people for pseudo gain. There is no excuse for it. There is no special light to see it under. All you are doing it attempting to rationalize your irrationality.

No. You are still inflicting damage whether or not you see it under a different light or not.

what about masochists?

Maschists have conflicts that are objective. They like pain for an underlying reason. It is best to consult it rather than encourage it.

oh yeah bad and good are subjective

There is no good and bad. There is an objective nature to the external models of our world. The pain you inflict on people are objective. Your actions can be as subjective as you wish it to be; you will always inflict suffering and pain unto another.

can you stop arguing now please?

No.

At 5/21/12 07:30 PM, AnonymousOfCali wrote:

beauty and ugliness=subjective

do you not know what these words mean?

Words mean nothing, actually.

We only give them meaning to examplify the abstract reflection of our mind's intricate system.

It doesn't matter whether or not you see the beauty as ugly or vice versa. It does not change the objective - in that you are causing the victim pain and suffering for your own illusionary gain. Can you really validate the objective premise with your interpersonal value? No. You are still inflicting damage whether or not you see it under a different light or not.

At 5/21/12 07:17 PM, AnonymousOfCali wrote:

more like fantasy bullshit and opinion

Pleasure is fantasy bullshit.

Mutilating the world's beauty for your own ugly needs is objective.

Night terrors - 1-2 hours

Good dreams - 5-7 hours

Best nights ever - 12+

Max time I've ever stayed up - 48+ hours.

At 5/20/12 03:28 PM, Viktor wrote:

No, red is the color of lust. God you 13 year olds are dumb, wait I am too.

No. The colour red causes your heart rate to increase.

At 5/21/12 06:32 PM, Buoy wrote: fucking saturated with strawmen as well

I will have you know *puts on sunglasses* my threads are factual fluid.

At 5/21/12 06:19 PM, HeavenDuff wrote:

At 5/20/12 05:39 PM, Insanctuary wrote: I was talking to someone; and they REALLY think that, since morals don't exist, their own PREMATURE judgment is ALLOWED to determine the fate of ANOTHER'S individual life.

Some people have a very limited appreciation of the concept of morality. Morality doesn't have to be something universal to exist. It also doesn't have to be subjective either. Some of you may know the philosopher Thomas Hobbes. Morality to him isn't all subjective nor is it universal. He believes morality comes from the society. Every individual according to Hobbes will act for his own greater good, but he makes another smart observation. If you want to obtain which is best for you, you will also have to submit to the rules of your society, unless this society really isn't serving your interests properly. This is very important in my analysis and Hobbes one.

I simply scrutinize the actions of another. I question why, how they decided upon it, and where it would lead. I do not like the term 'morality' because it is the 50/50 version of the term 'opinion'. I can not stand it when every one treats their ideas like favorites and significants. Ideas are not to be played with. Ideas should be treated seriously and taken care of as if they were your own children. These ideas continue to affect the interface of our world, and will until the end of time. People need to go from children in an Arts & Craft room - where they are gluing popsicle sticks together - to building an impregnable tower that pierces beyond the heavens. That is how my mind uses its abstract images to express what I believe people should be doing metaphorically with their ideas. I do not entirely agree with Thomas Hobbes because of my own ideologies I wish to present in my response for the second paragraph.

To demonstrate this idea, you can use various fictive examples. One of these is the example of the two fishermen. Both will want to make their business bigger and better, but in this specific example we know that if both fishermen raise the amount of fishes they get per day, one day there won't be any fish left and both will go bankrupt. In his example, Hobbes will also insist on the fact that if one of the fishermen decide to reduce his catches and the other doesn't then the other will be able to raise the number of fishes he catches without the sea getting emptied of it's fishes. The first fisherman would then lose all competitivity and go bankrupt. The problem here is that according to Hobbes, both man will want the best for themselves. So you can predict that both man will want to keep catching mores fish and none of them will sacrifice himself for the other. Best solution for both fishermen would than be... to both reduce the amount of fish they catch to maintin a good quantity of fishes in the sea. So for their own good, they should understand that they have to reduce their catches.

The thing Hobbes forgot, via my own ideological perspective, is that these two men are NOT fishing for their best interest, but much rather, they are fishing to compensate for what they lack in a psychological; abstract way. They are reaching for the top because the atmosphere of winning tends to fill in their god-shaped hole. They probably lost when they were younger, and they did not take it lightly, so this is their compensation to redeem themselves. If you disagree with this, do let me know.

Following that simple logic, not killing another human is the moral thing to do. Why ? Because if we all accept not to kill anybody else, we should be protected from other's will to kill us.

People do not work that way though. People are complicated entanglements of abstract conflict. We know that this god-shaped hole is never satisfied; but we only continue feeding it day by day.

(Btw, sorry if my English isn't all perfect. If you didn't understand some part, just tell me. I'll try to re-explain it better)

Your English does not faze me.

Do not worry.

At 5/21/12 05:56 PM, AnonymousOfCali wrote:

At 5/21/12 05:50 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

yes you CAN do those things and while morals have influenced their prevention they cannot stop them because morals are subjective feelings

you haven't brought anything new to the argument which doesn't allow me to.

You CAN do anything you want by default. Laws, morals, restrictions don't exist.

There is something inside us that attempts to communicate with us, and we are ignoring it for selfish intentions. It is that 'gut' feeling. That 'intuitive' influence. You can not really stand and tell me that you CAN 'just' do it because nothing is holding you back. Why would you victimize someone? If you 'just' listen, you can feel a slight influence attempting to communicate with you. It 'guides' you very subtly; and I assure you, it means well. Not very many listen to this 'inner' influence, but my father listened to his, and every time, it outranked every one else's agendas. It was able to formulate actions that the conscious mind wasn't able to comprise.

If you do not want to believe in that alone, then atleast tell me how such an advanced species are committing selfish actions? Why are we not using the abstract brilliance of our brains to construct something? Instead of raping the innocence of others, destroying things, being a first-class monster?

By Mostly Everyone's Logic

a) you can rape a young girl if you don't get caught; it must feel real good having a small play toy that squirms.

b) you can run into a retirement home, into a patient's room, and then shut off the machine; all because you did not like old people and thought it was fine if you weren't getting caught.

c) set someone's house on fire; all because the fire turns you on.

d) kidnap someone, bring them to your scientific lair, strap them to a table, and laugh like a mad scientist as you cut into their flesh; all because you played the game ''Amnesia'' and were turned on by the screams.

Who cares about the person we victimize. Who cares about them. Everything only matters when it makes ME feel good.

a) let the young girl cry in darkness, and always feel liek she is trash; going on the wrong path, doing drugs, always reliving that painful memory.

b) let the old person not live the years they have left, and ignore the pain and sorrow you've induced unto the family; esp. if the old person fought many wars, and was once a well known person.

c) let the people risk getting burned alive; tearing apart the family and destroying their hard earned house they lived in.

d) ...

You are untolerable. It is laughable that I even try to reason with any of you, when you only make it clear enough for me to see how much you are trapped inside your own subjective assholes to realize how hypocritical, irrational, mindless, careless, and insensitive you all are. I am completely dumbfounded - how can you keep a straight face, when you tell me that X is validated when a random person is involved, but if you were involved in that X ''Oh! Please, spare my life. Let me defend my life like a hypocrite and completely ignore all of those lost lives I encouraged because I thought it was rational to accept other opinions from critically insane ethics. It just never occured to my selfish ass what monster of a practice I encouraged because I never had to experience it myself unti now. Please spare my life!''

I'm simply done with all of you.

For once in my life - you are not worth my time.

At 5/20/12 10:49 PM, AnonymousOfCali wrote:

At 5/20/12 10:46 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

Your ENTIRE life is built on magical thinking.

At least I don't think my morals are objective, that I see through other people's eyes, and think I know everything about people I have never met.

I don't have morals?

I don't see right or wrong?

I don't see good or bad?

What I DO see - is that you are a fucking IRRATIONAL fuck. You have NO legitimate CLAIMS. All of your reasons are SELFISH. You are a dumbass, pseudo-psycho pants.

At 5/20/12 10:35 PM, II2none wrote:

if it does what about hunting for food or self protection?

We are not animals.

As for killing animals, I am not touching that subject. There is something off about that as well, but I simply can not find anything right now to back it up at all. I'm talking about other humans right now. I'm talking about us.

As for self-protection, where the person pushed you to do it, then self-defence is self-defence. There was no other choice. They died at the reuslt of it - move on.

At 5/20/12 10:42 PM, AnonymousOfCali wrote:

Magical thinking

DENIAL

Your ENTIRE life is built on magical thinking.

At 5/20/12 10:30 PM, AnonymousOfCali wrote:

The feel when you clearly stated that you did not believe morals existed in a PM to me.

Calling out your morals for killing does not mean I am saying that morals exist.

That is like me calling out the practices of God, then you accusing me of saying there is a God.

Then you realise - OH MY FUCKING GOD - I am looking at things from other people's eyes; not my own! There goes one of your accusations.

At 5/20/12 10:18 PM, SolidToad wrote:

I'm sure EMPHASIZING is done with ITALICS. I mean COME on, there's a HONKING big BUTTON above your text BOX that says EMPHASIS.

When I am EMPHASIZING my IDEOLOGIES - I like to CAPS it for LOW LEVEL emphasis, and when I am REALLY trying to EMPHASIZE myself, I will turn to using ITALICS with CAPS for STRONGER EMPHASIS.

Versus.

When I am emphasizing my ideologies - I like to caps it for low level emphasis... See? It is down-right dull; boring; slow-paced and completely destroying the nature of emphasizing.

At 5/20/12 10:12 PM, II2none wrote:

You do realise - when I said killing was never justifiable - I said it through the world's eyes; not mine?

I don't understand what that means.

It means that I do not see through my eyes. I see from the world's eyes. I question those who question. I do not stand as myself; I stand as the competition to their interpersonal values, beliefs and ideas. I'm like a mirror that is designed to challenge each and every single part of you. I become their own challenge. I am much more of a mind - and much less of a person.

At 5/20/12 10:07 PM, AnonymousOfCali wrote: when you have a set of morals, those are subjective

Attempting to validate killing is a moral stance. Which goes against your stance that morals don't exist - hypocrite.

Attempting to validate your selfish reasons for killing is sheer stupidity.

At 5/20/12 10:00 PM, MrPercie wrote: Im gunna feel like a cunt for doing this but

mfw I dont know what subjective means :O

Sit down here, and let me explain.

When someone comes up to you and calls you a fag - they are being subjective.

When someone says the cloud looks more like a penis - they are being subjective.

When someone says they are smarter - they might be smarter - but it could also be subjectivity in general terms. They can't be better than you at everything - right?

When you make posts like ''You don't know what subjectivity is'' - or imply it in any clever way - you are being a subjective fuck.

When someone stabs you - that is not subjective.

When someone farts and you hate the smell - that is not subjective.

When you stomp on someone's art piece - that is not subjective by action; but subjective for why it lead to the action.

At 5/20/12 09:44 PM, II2none wrote: Murder as a whole does cause more harm then good but killing is subjective. Killing for our safety is subjective killing to avenge is sunjective, killing for the sake of killing isn't.

You do realise - you are subjectively stating the subjectivity in each context of killing - yes?

You do realise - when I said killing was never justifiable - I said it through the world's eyes; not mine?

At 5/20/12 09:41 PM, AnonymousOfCali wrote:

At 5/20/12 09:39 PM, Insanctuary wrote: Thank you for - again - pointing out how much more I understand life - as a whole - than you do.

Well time to hit the old dusty trail.....

While you are at it, you should uncover all of those skeletons you've buried.

At 5/20/12 09:37 PM, AnonymousOfCali wrote:

At 5/20/12 09:33 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

Where is the evidence? Don't have any? Not very surprising. Can you be any more predictable?

I gave more than several SELFISH examples. Your web of lies can't change that.

I fixed that for you. Thank you for - again - pointing out how much more I understand life - as a whole - than you do.

At 5/20/12 09:30 PM, bgraybr wrote:

At 5/20/12 09:27 PM, Insanctuary wrote: So it wasn't as irrelevant as you make it out to be.

Yes it is. Attacking others doesn't defend your faults.

Accusative faults - that are as justified as any murder in the world.

Where is the evidence? Don't have any? Not very surprising. Can you be any more predictable?

At 5/20/12 09:08 PM, bgraybr wrote:

At 5/20/12 09:04 PM, Insanctuary wrote: What? They always want perfection . why else do they hide away from corruption and chaos? They are like flower children in suits. ''Save the world!'' ''Peace and love!'' I'm just going to sit here on my knees while I expect you to do one of the GREATEST responsibilities in the world instead of standing up and DOING IT WITH MY OWN HANDS. They want perfection but they are too fucking weak to fight for it without using guns and other childish procedures. WE HAVE A VOICe. We should USE it. PROPERLY!

He wasn't talking about religious people though. He was talking about you. Instead of addressing his question, you started attacking religious people. Very off topic.

You mean the accusation of me? Of course. Except - the symptoms of narcissism only reminded me of the real narcists in the world. You'd think that loving a God would eliminate narcissism, but it doesn't, them saying they love God is the compensation for them saying they love themselves. They are in denial of their god shaped ego. So it wasn't as irrelevant as you make it out to be.

At 5/20/12 08:57 PM, bgraybr wrote:

At 5/20/12 08:49 PM, Insanctuary wrote: There is a difference between your context of killing and Anon's type. Anon is using killing as a justification for EVEN innocent by-standers. The role of killing is the antithesis of each other. Your context of killing has to do with the cliche good guys Vs. bad guy. Anon is saying that nobody is a good guy or bad guy and killing can be justified. Meaning that a BAD guy can kill a GOOD guy in layman's terms.

Well first of all good and bad are subjective.

EVERYTHING WE DO OR SAY IS SUBJECTIVE. The thing is; I speak for the WORLD. I speak for LIFE. NOT MYSELF. THAT is what makes what I do and say OBJECTIVE.

Some ultra-nationalist types would kill someone just for being born in the wrong country. Do I agree with it? No.

This isn't about agreeing or disagreeing. This is LIFE for fucking sake! This isn't some 50/50 game! These are LIVEE we are JUDGING the fate of!

But it's certainly justified in their eyes, in their morals. It's something that's shaped by their entire world view, in which they are the good guys and the "innocent bystanders" are evil or at the very least propagators of an evil system.

NOTHING is justified. Interpretation is NEVER objective! If they can not see through the eyes of the world; then they can not JUDGE. The world SPEAKs; if you just LISTEN. It doesn't need a mouth; it has a LANGUAGE.

I already said that we should put the threatening people to sleep. They are an endangerment to anyone's potential life. They can not function properly. When a fruit is not fed its nutrients it spoils. You can not UNSPOIL a fruit.

Well that's your opinion. You're being awful judgmental of those spoiled fruits.

No. It is NOT an opinion. They are not beneficial. People who are threats to our lives should be put to sleep just like any other animal that has gone mad like those pitbulls that were put to sleep. WHY would you EVER keep them alive somewhere locked up? That is THE CRUELEST PUNISHMENT. Putting them to sleep is the ONLY WAY.

At 5/20/12 08:51 PM, bgraybr wrote:

At 5/20/12 08:44 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

Hypersensitivity to any insults or imagined insults (you got very mad when I downvoted your audio and started to insult me)

Idiot. Plenty of people hate faggots that 0 bomb 'just because' - or in your case - ''i am evil.''

You overreacted just a bit.

The corruption of our world begs to differ.

Detesting those who do not admire them (narcissistic abuse)

I detest those because the mass is fucking ignorant! INCLUDING you.

Everyone else is crazy, not me!

The MASS is not EVERYONE - but MOSTLY everyone.

Pretending to be more important than they really are(obvious)

I never play pretend in a world that is VERY serious - unlike the previously mentioned IGNORANT mass.

You're just above all of the masses. Above the system.

Yea, because sucking on the teats of reality's corruption; pretending to be a judge; masturbating to all of the materials of the world while ignoring the fundamental essence of life all together; and - oh yeah - making up excuses to validate my way of living; pretending to be something I am not and overall living as some fucked up experiment that really has no core personality or character. Thank you for making my point even further. I do not distract myself. I do not hide. I do not second-guess. I do not PRETEND. I do not EXCUSE. I will rip the horns out of the beasts' head.

Bragging (subtly but persistently) and exaggerating their achievements

I do NOT brag. I share my experiences. Not my FAULT that my experiences are better than yours, child.

It's not my fault that I was born a genius with a godlike body.

Someone can't take it when someone knows life better than they do!

Claiming to be an "expert" at many things

I'm an expert at LIFE.

Lol wow. You essentially repeated what he said.

I am an expert; everything I say and do only reflects off of that much.

Inability to view the world from the perspective of other people(again you think your opinions are absolute)

This is an ABSOLUTE veneer. What a fictitious statement. Back it up - NOW.

Your arguments speak for themselves. This has already been pointed out to you dozens of times.

Your way of taking everything I say the wrong way speaks for itself that what you heard in my words were LIES like everythign else in your life.

Magical thinking: Narcissists see themselves as perfect, using distortion and illusion known as magical thinking. They also use projection to dump shame onto others.(you have done this to me by saying I am selfish and a judge but you are in fact the only one judging people, I have not killed in my lifetime)

Sounds like religious people or people who think that killing can be justified based off of their SELFISH reasons. Not me - fuck off.

You just projected the blame onto religious people instead of refuting his accusation. Great job Mr. Narcissy McNarcissist.

What? They always want perfection . why else do they hide away from corruption and chaos? They are like flower children in suits. ''Save the world!'' ''Peace and love!'' I'm just going to sit here on my knees while I expect you to do one of the GREATEST responsibilities in the world instead of standing up and DOING IT WITH MY OWN HANDS. They want perfection but they are too fucking weak to fight for it without using guns and other childish procedures. WE HAVE A VOICe. We should USE it. PROPERLY!

Sounds like you are describing yourself! Way to go! You can't not simply accept how fucked up your POV is so you turn to accusations and ad hominems. You block me and run away from the truth. That the consenquences NEVER lie. That selfishness NEVER validates anything. That killing; i.e murder; does NOT constitute any benefits! Killing is murder. Go ahead and try to tell me otherwise. When you PUSH the first domino - it is MURDER. If you are defending your life - it is NOT murder. It is SELF-DEFENCE.

Holy shit he's like the textbook definition. Like so fucked up that it's impossible for him to see what a huge narcissist he is. IMPOSSIBLE.

Holy shit. You are just seeing what you WANT to see. Just like your pseudo homosexuality. Just like Anon's psychopathy. Just like Christian's God. Just like superstitious people and ghosts and aliens. You only CONVINCE yourself a FACADE. While I'm over here uncovering all of the fundamental truth that nobody can deny.

At 5/20/12 08:37 PM, bgraybr wrote:

If you support that then you support killing. It's justified because the person that's being killed was a murderer.

There is a difference between your context of killing and Anon's type. Anon is using killing as a justification for EVEN innocent by-standers. The role of killing is the antithesis of each other. Your context of killing has to do with the cliche good guys Vs. bad guy. Anon is saying that nobody is a good guy or bad guy and killing can be justified. Meaning that a BAD guy can kill a GOOD guy in layman's terms.

I already said that we should put the threatening people to sleep. They are an endangerment to anyone's potential life. They can not function properly. When a fruit is not fed its nutrients it spoils. You can not UNSPOIL a fruit.

At 5/20/12 08:35 PM, AnonymousOfCali wrote: sorry I missed some

Hypersensitivity to any insults or imagined insults (you got very mad when I downvoted your audio and started to insult me)

Idiot. Plenty of people hate faggots that 0 bomb 'just because' - or in your case - ''i am evil.''

Detesting those who do not admire them (narcissistic abuse)

I detest those because the mass is fucking ignorant! INCLUDING you.

Pretending to be more important than they really are(obvious)

I never play pretend in a world that is VERY serious - unlike the previously mentioned IGNORANT mass.

Bragging (subtly but persistently) and exaggerating their achievements

I do NOT brag. I share my experiences. Not my FAULT that my experiences are better than yours, child.

Claiming to be an "expert" at many things

I'm an expert at LIFE. I am a jack of all trades 2.0. Not bad or incredible at anything.

Inability to view the world from the perspective of other people(again you think your opinions are absolute)

This is an ABSOLUTE veneer. What a fictitious statement. Back it up - NOW.

Magical thinking: Narcissists see themselves as perfect, using distortion and illusion known as magical thinking. They also use projection to dump shame onto others.(you have done this to me by saying I am selfish and a judge but you are in fact the only one judging people, I have not killed in my lifetime)

Sounds like religious people or people who think that killing can be justified based off of their SELFISH reasons. Not me - fuck off.

Narcissists do not recognize that they have boundaries and that others are separate and are not extensions of themselves

Sounds like you are describing yourself! Way to go! You can't not simply accept how fucked up your POV is so you turn to accusations and ad hominems. You block me and run away from the truth. That the consenquences NEVER lie. That selfishness NEVER validates anything. That killing; i.e murder; does NOT constitute any benefits! Killing is murder. Go ahead and try to tell me otherwise. When you PUSH the first domino - it is MURDER. If you are defending your life - it is NOT murder. It is SELF-DEFENCE.