Is it more moral to love or hate evil people? (bible, punished)

[Trimac20]

Originally Posted by Tricky D

Originally Posted by progmac
The point is not whether it is more moral to love or hate evil people, the point is should we, as a society, tolerate evil?

BTW Jesus saying that you should love your enemies is something entirely different as saying that you should love evil (people).
Simply because the fact is that your enemy might not necessarily be evil.
On the other hand a rapist, with the exception of being mentally disabled, can only be evil.

You don't people good people occasionally commit evil acts? We're all evil, Tricky, you don't need the Good Book to tell you that, just look around. But what matters is realising that trying to do as much good as we can.

[Tricky D]

Originally Posted by Trimac20

You don't people good people occasionally commit evil acts? We're all evil, Tricky, you don't need the Good Book to tell you that, just look around. But what matters is realising that trying to do as much good as we can.

Again, there is a difference between saying that all people are sinners and saying that all people are evil.
People who tell lies commit a sin, but that does not necessarily make them evil. During WWII many Dutch citizens denied to the Nazi government that they where harbouring Jews while that was what they were doing, which makes them liars but I would not call them evil.

FYI those people who always take care of themselves first thus only are capable of loving themselves can only be evil.

[Trimac20]

Originally Posted by Tricky D

Originally Posted by Trimac20 Again, there is a difference between saying that all people are sinners and saying that all people are evil.
People who tell lies commit a sin, but that does not necessarily make them evil. During WWII many Dutch citizens denied to the Nazi government that they where harbouring Jews while that was what they were doing, which makes them liars but I would not call them evil.

FYI those people who always take care of themselves first thus only are capable of loving themselves can only be evil.

Sorry I don't think I phrased what I wanted to say probably, my fault. I meant that in a sense none of us is 'less evil' than another because we all have the capability for it, but equally we have the capability for good.

Is lying ALWAYS bad? That's a moral/philosophical question for the ages. I try to be as honest as possible, but I won't hesitate to lie to someone like the Nazis to save my family. Besides, it would seem pretty crummy not to when I've lied about smaller things in the past!

[tgnostic]

The evil men we hate are always a matter of respecting or preferring not to respect the Others' notion about equality. In the existential essence of equality we first know ourselves truly equal. How we regard ourselves too often may be a meaning of privilege.

[Tricky D]

Originally Posted by Trimac20

I meant that in a sense none of us is 'less evil' than another because we all have the capability for it, but equally we have the capability for good.

And my point is that there is a difference between serial rapists and selfish people; meaning serial rapists are always selfish individuals but not every selfish person is a rapist.
So a serial rapist can only be more evil than a selfish person, simply because he is unable to love others like he loves himself.

[tgnostic]

Yeah, well I always thought that the democratic customer service at a police department made the human judgment about one's intolerance. Meanwhile, th judgments at learning about what it took one to know one in the financial trust companies was just to remind US: yu', that evil madman was on the other end of the line years ago. My human nature was truly selfless for those "evil" anti-racists.

[Blue Hue]

Originally Posted by Tricky D

Originally Posted by Trimac20 And my point is that there is a difference between serial rapists and selfish people; meaning serial rapists are always selfish individuals but not every selfish person is a rapist.
So a serial rapist can only be more evil than a selfish person, simply because he is unable to love others like he loves himself.

serial rapist has no admiration, constructive regard, respect, or love of self.

thats the problem.

recourse in a suffocation of perceived rejection, the act of rape is a recording or replay of how the rapist feels he or she has been treated in life. relative to the rapist it is logical and necessary.

detached in a perceived self useless contribution... by way of an implanted suggestion the rapist longs for communication and identification through ,mutual hopelessness...no one understands me says the serial rapist, i shall find someone or many.. who will feel as i feel.
i will make it happen.

its what the rapist ultimately has to share..abolishment in constructive hope. a mental case who cannot possibly love anything including a positive reflection of self. thats the problem

I think it would be moral to hate the personality, which enables the evil. Some thought considers hate the act, love the sinner.

I find that a little to general. If we could see a mind and the pure percentage of either reasonable good will or other, its easy to see how it could be confusing to love an evil individual when...perhaps 85% is in the darkest of darkness. I would like to reject that 85% of the personality.

If theres only 15% left in order to possibly re-install normality thats his or her problem....not mine. I think standing tough to the realities is important.

People can't improve if they think everything is oh...everthing is ok. Well its not ok.. 15% thats all I can work with here pal, so if you think something is odd....figure it out.

[Tricky D]

Originally Posted by Blue Hue

serial rapist has no admiration, constructive regard, respect, or love of self.

If a rapist is unable to love himself (read: satisfy his urge), then why commit the act of rape?
I mean why would a rapist feel the urge to rape others if it did not somehow make him feel better about himself?

[Blue Hue]

[quote=Tricky D;19080064]Originally Posted by Blue Hue If a rapist is unable to love himself (read: satisfy his urge), then why commit the act of rape?
I mean why would a rapist feel the urge to rape others if it did not somehow make him feel better about himself?[/quote

Opinion...We could look at drug or alcohol addiction. Not drawing attention to addiction but the idea of need.. in a serious state of desperation.

When a drug addict gets his or her fix, they are not necessarily focused on
feeling better about them self as you note, but escaping the intolerable moment of withdrawal. Theres no foresight or care for the future in desperate need.

...the rapist in opinion doesn't feel the urge to go about with the destructive behavior in order to feel better about himself. The consideration of not planning an attack would be intolerable.

An escape from self. I believe the rapist is ultimately a victim syndrome case. He feels outrageously victimized. The only way out is to reverse the role, including other detail offered earlier

If I burn my hand accidentally, I have the urge to put some aloe vera or butter on it, maybe cold water would be better, the presence of mind is not to feel better, but to address the pain

[Tricky D]

Originally Posted by Blue Hue

An escape from self. I believe the rapist is ultimately a victim syndrome case. He feels outrageously victimized.

You only prove my point that a serial rapist only cares for himself.
Heck, he is even wiling to hurt others in order to stop feeling victimized himself.

But the difference between a serial rapist and an alcoholic, with the exception of those rapists who suffering from a mental handicap (like the inability to empathise with others), is that a serial rapist does not suffer from a diminished mental capacity; he isn't intoxicated like alcoholics are.

Besidez, every time an alcoholic falls of the wagon he is admitting that he cares more for himself than others, which is no different from the behaviour of serial rapists.