Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You think nuking 150,000 Japanese (mostly civilians) made up for America almost eradicating an entire indigenous culture?
No wonder we have a morality problem - too many Americans have been duped into ignorance and into believing ridiculous rationalizations for inexcusable offenses.
Many more would have died had there been a land invasion of Japan.
Many more would have died had there been a land invasion of Japan.
While this may be true it is not an either/or situation, there are othher ways the situation could have been handled. Meanwhile ask yourself whether it was necessary to bomb BOTH Hiroshima AND Nagasaki with two different versions of the bomb, or whether the attitude was one of punishment and curiosity about the diffence and its effect on people without regard for the humanity of the victims.
Being fearful of the future is faithlessness as people who pray in fear will find there is no answer from God .......... See Donald will make a Great president which will in his plans bring the jobs back to America , which will in turn raise the prices ......or what we have now is no jobs and lower prices .....So what is there to be fearful with that ..............Then God has not left America , and Jesus will be there until the missionaries and evangelicals stop helping people get saved ....
"Nuking" japan was the right thing to do. That ends that part.
"That ends that part." In other words, you're not really willing to acknowledge that reasonable people could actually disagree with you. How conveniently self-ratifying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle
After that uneducated remark there is no need to address anything else.
You've really crafted a bulwark for your ego in this regard, haven't you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle
You really don't know what you are talking about. So continue on like an empty barrel down a rocky road.
I suppose my mother wore Army boots, too, eh?
This is a Religion and Spirituality forum. You shouldn't be so surprised about having your personal preferences responded to with moral repudiation, when your personal preferences actually rationalize using the power of government to defend slavery, and using nuclear weapons on civilian populations. You can choose to live your life in accordance with such corrupted beliefs and values, but make no mistake, your "response" was nothing but a ridiculously puerile attempt to make it seem like you had a legitimate response to the message to which you responded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddie gein
So you think God approved of nuking them, huh?
Apparently. Self-ratifying rationalization is an insidious thing. When people cannot justify their personal preferences on the merits, they simply declare their preferences as meritorious, and as the only meritorious perspectives, regardless of how internally-inconsistent those preferences would be as a basis for interactions between different people who embraced them.
"That ends that part." In other words, you're not really willing to acknowledge that reasonable people could actually disagree with you. How conveniently self-ratifying.
You've really crafted a bulwark for your ego in this regard, haven't you?
I suppose my mother wore Army boots, too, eh?
This is a Religion and Spirituality forum. You shouldn't be so surprised about having your personal preferences responded to with moral repudiation, when your personal preferences actually rationalize using the power of government to defend slavery, and using nuclear weapons on civilian populations. You can choose to live your life in accordance with such corrupted beliefs and values, but make no mistake, your "response" was nothing but a ridiculously puerile attempt to make it seem like you had a legitimate response to the message to which you responded.
Apparently. Self-ratifying rationalization is an insidious thing. When people cannot justify their personal preferences on the merits, they simply declare their preferences as meritorious, and as the only meritorious perspectives, regardless of how internally-inconsistent those preferences would be as a basis for interactions between different people who embraced them.
you attacked/mocked the USA because we nuked Japan at the end of a very nasty war. I mean use another example, not that one. And added only 1/2 of the story on the other personal slant/agenda.
you attacked/mocked the USA because we nuked Japan at the end of a very nasty war.
I highlighted the generally-accepted understanding that attacking unarmed, civilian populations (with or without nuclear weapons, incidentally) is morally wrong. I'm sorry you cannot bring yourself to admit that, even if you yourself don't abide by such moral precepts.
you attacked/mocked the USA because we nuked Japan at the end of a very nasty war. I mean use another example, not that one. And added only 1/2 of the story on the other personal slant/agenda.
Many more would have died had there been a land invasion of Japan.
But, NO ONE would have died had God intervened and prevent the WAR initially.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
