Yes ... I am angry at this low life piece of garbage who decided to take his frustrations out on others. I am angry that this individual was too much of a coward to take steps to improve himself and make *his* life better.
As far as I'm aware, he had an MA in neuroscience. What are your qualifications, Rusha?
Top of his class. He had an advanced degree. And society as a whole basically said "Screw you!" No friends. No romantic interests. Nobody who was willing to employee him.
I'm not going to try to justify what he did. But I will say this: based on what I know about him, I don't think it's too hard to understand, at least in part, why.
Quote:
You come off as being both fascinated and amused.
I am fascinated, and I was amused. Why are you not fascinated? What he did was so amazingly well thought out and carefully planned. Not to mention the fact that he's pretty much said nothing about why he did what he did.
This is a fascinating case.
When a Man Lies He Murders
Some Part of the World
These Are the Pale Deaths Which
Men Miscall Their Lives
All this I Cannot Bear
to Witness Any Longer
Cannot the Kingdom of Salvation
Take Me Home
Slogan/motto:
Of course you realize this means war! ~ Bugs Bunny
Reputation:
July 21st, 2012, 09:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Traditio
I'm not going to try to justify what he did. But I will say this: based on what I know about him, I don't think it's too hard to understand, at least in part, why.
The very fact that you state you can *understand* what he did is a justification. There is no good reason under the sun for what this guy did.
Quote:
I am fascinated, and I was amused. Why are you not fascinated? What he did was so amazingly well thought out and carefully planned. Not to mention the fact that he's pretty much said nothing about why he did what he did.
I am horrified and angry at what he did. I don't care one iota about *why* he did it. There is no reason to be fascinated about why a lone terrorist committed an act of terrorism.
Quote:
This is a fascinating case.
Don't forget amusing. Heaven forbid should your sick sense of humor not receive the rush that comes from a multiple massacre.
Slogan/motto:
Success is a journey, not a destination. So stop running.
Reputation:
July 21st, 2012, 09:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Traditio
Are you angry at our man because he had no regard for human life and reduced them to mere pawns, mere commodities for his little joke? To carry out his little punchline?
Well that's The Joker's Joke, TOL. That's the punchline.
That ship sailed long before he ever picked up a gun.
Until he says something I'm not sure how much speculating we should do about his motives. Perhaps he was trying to make a point about society and the economy. I hope we find out.
Slogan/motto:
Luke 9:23 Then He said to them all, “If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me."
Reputation:
July 21st, 2012, 10:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusha
The very fact that you state you can *understand* what he did is a justification. There is no good reason under the sun for what this guy did.
I am horrified and angry at what he did. I don't care one iota about *why* he did it. There is no reason to be fascinated about why a lone terrorist committed an act of terrorism.
I don't think understanding causal factors, especially if they exist, would diminish culpability. At least it shouldn't. We certainly need to retain both, because society and the individual need to take steps to remedy this problem. Take for example inner-city gang violence. No one would say, "I don't care one iota about *why* they did it. There is no reason to be fascinated about why these people do the things they do." The conservative idea that it is 100% individual and 0% society, as well as the liberal idea that it is 0% individual and 100% society are both bankrupt. Personally, I don't even see those categories as mutually exclusive: the individual does not cease to be a moral agent when obstacles are placed in his way.
"If a sheerly linguistic version of the gospel could be concocted, it would merely so be no longer the gospel. In the Lutheran Reformation’s understanding, which we believe in this matter to be correct, the sacraments make the inalienable externality of the gospel message and therefore are necessary to the authenticity of that message." (Christian Dogmatics [1984], II:302-303 as cited in Pontifications)
The very fact that you state you can *understand* what he did is a justification. There is no good reason under the sun for what this guy did.
False. There's a difference between an act being rationally motivated and an act being morally upright. I think that it's very likely that his act was rationally motivated, but I deny that his act was morally upright.
Consider the following: a man has a girlfriend and the two fornicate. This is not a morally upright act. But there's a clear motive which we can understand.
In any case, I never said that he had a good reason for killing 12 random people and wounding 50 random others. I merely said that there was probably a reason which, at least for him, was personally compelling. Personally compelling is not the same thing as morally compelling.
No, morally speaking, and I have said this more than once, the act must absolutely be condemned. He murdered 12 random people and intended to murder at least 50 others. I imagine that this seriously wounds the Sacred Heart.
In that light, I really shouldn't be laughing.
Quote:
I am horrified and angry at what he did. I don't care one iota about *why* he did it.
Why not?
Quote:
There is no reason to be fascinated about why a lone terrorist committed an act of terrorism.
It may point to real social problems which we should be concerned about.
When a Man Lies He Murders
Some Part of the World
These Are the Pale Deaths Which
Men Miscall Their Lives
All this I Cannot Bear
to Witness Any Longer
Cannot the Kingdom of Salvation
Take Me Home
I don't think understanding causal factors, especially if they exist, would diminish culpability. At least it shouldn't. We certainly need to retain both, because society and the individual need to take steps to remedy this problem. Take for example inner-city gang violence. No one would say, "I don't care one iota about *why* they did it. There is no reason to be fascinated about why these people do the things they do." The conservative idea that it is 100% individual and 0% society, as well as the liberal idea that it is 0% individual and 100% society are both bankrupt. Personally, I don't even see those categories as mutually exclusive: the individual does not cease to be a moral agent when obstacles are placed in his way.
A professor of mine once posed a question very much like this, as I recall it, to me once when I argued for strict personal responsibility:
Suppose that a mother steals food to feed her children. Who is guilty for what she's done? The mother? Or the employers who don't pay her enough to support herself and her children?
My instinctive response was that they are both responsible.
When a Man Lies He Murders
Some Part of the World
These Are the Pale Deaths Which
Men Miscall Their Lives
All this I Cannot Bear
to Witness Any Longer
Cannot the Kingdom of Salvation
Take Me Home
Because there is no justification under the sun for murdering innocent people.
The moment society starts questioning *why* individuals do such things is the moment we open the door to defending their actions.
So instead you'd prefer to stick your fingers in your ears and go "LALALALALALA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!"
I really don't know how to say this; so I'll just say it:
Rusha, that's retarded.
When a Man Lies He Murders
Some Part of the World
These Are the Pale Deaths Which
Men Miscall Their Lives
All this I Cannot Bear
to Witness Any Longer
Cannot the Kingdom of Salvation
Take Me Home
Slogan/motto:
Luke 9:23 Then He said to them all, “If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me."
Reputation:
July 21st, 2012, 01:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusha
Because there is no justification under the sun for murdering innocent people.
The moment society starts questioning *why* individuals do such things is the moment we open the door to defending their actions.
Rationally motivated does not equal justified. Saying "he did this for a reason" does not mean "he was justified in doing this":
Quote:
Originally Posted by Traditio
There's a difference between an act being rationally motivated and an act being morally upright. I think that it's very likely that his act was rationally motivated, but I deny that his act was morally upright.
"If a sheerly linguistic version of the gospel could be concocted, it would merely so be no longer the gospel. In the Lutheran Reformation’s understanding, which we believe in this matter to be correct, the sacraments make the inalienable externality of the gospel message and therefore are necessary to the authenticity of that message." (Christian Dogmatics [1984], II:302-303 as cited in Pontifications)
If they can get into his apartment without blowing up the place, clues as to why or his thought process will be found. He obviously planned this for quite some time.
A professor of mine once posed a question very much like this, as I recall it, to me once when I argued for strict personal responsibility:
Suppose that a mother steals food to feed her children. Who is guilty for what she's done? The mother? Or the employers who don't pay her enough to support herself and her children?
My instinctive response was that they are both responsible.
The mother because she didn't ask for assistance through her church or sign up for food stamps instead when they are available to her.
Why is it the employers responsibility to set their wages based on an employees children?
What's new? 
~ J Vernon McGee Ro 3:23, 5:8, 6:23, 10:9, 10:13.
Linear Mode
