[Weatherlight]

Who are you to say I am stating things that are false?

A person who thinks. Any person can accurately state that a statement is factually untrue. Hmm scripts can do that too.

"Rabbits are cute," "Rabbits are boring," "Rice cakes are tasty," "Rice cakes taste bad," "The moon is pretty," or "The moon is ugly" are opinions.

"Rabbits do not live on, nor make rice cakes on, the moon," "Whether rabbits are cute or not is subjective," and "Rice cakes are made from rice and sometimes other ingredients" are facts.

I'm sorry if you don't know the difference between the objective and the subjective. I don't claim that my subjective views are objectively correct. I claim that objective facts are objectively correct, by definition.

If you really want to reduce the rates of this sort of thing, if you really want to defend potential victims, and you were motivated enough to do something about it, you would support efforts to reduce pain/violence--particularly towards infants, children, and teenagers--and increase somatosensory pleasure. This is based on fact. If you don't much, and you really just want to get revenge, then support sadistic torture all you like, just know that it's not the same thing.

obviously you are the only one who is factual

I was the only one being factual in this thread about the correlation between the death penalty and crime. If you were truly interested in having an opinion that conforms to fact, you would educate yourself. It's like saying "My opinion is that everyone should give rabbit pellets to adult guinea pigs, because they are healthier than Cavy Cuisine or KM's pellets." It's an opinion based on a falsehood; the latter part of the sentence is factually untrue. If the person learned the real facts, they might or might not change their opinion, but I would hope they would.

saying that myself and others are saying false things just for the fun of it

Please quote one example where I said anyone was saying false things "just for the fun of it."

I thought so. I am now saying that you made a false accusation against me personally. Could you stop?

Man it must be nice to be pshycic, I wish I was.

Sometimes I wish I was psychic, yeah. It might be nice. But then again, it might not be. I guess it depends on how it worked. Totally off topic, though.

"The opposite of asking me to read this" is ..telling me not to read it.

No, I'm saying that the opposite is not telling you to read it. Big difference. You're going on and on about how I'm not respecting your choice about this thread, yada yada, when I specifically PMed you so I could communicate no matter what you chose about reading this thread, so you would be free to choose either way even if you wanted to know what I said. If that's way over your head, I won't explain again.

You're doing a really good job of leaving the thread, not caring about what I say, not arguing, etc by posting tons of criticism about what I say =\ There's no shame in admitting that you care about what I say, enough to say many paragraphs about it, is there? Isn't that the whole point of communication, to care about what other people say? If you really don't want to deal with me, you do have the CHOICE of not dealing with me. You can stop communicating with me. I'm not forcing you to read anything I type, and I'm not forcing you to type to me. You have a brain and can think for yourself whether to do these things, right?

I am trying my best not to argue

Congrats. Why bother? Continue to argue away all you like!

rather end this I think meaningless debate. What will come of this? Who will win? Nothing, no one is what I think. I also think that no one person on this earth is 100 pct correct about this situation therefore no one wins.

Is life all about "winning" to you? Can't some things, like forum discussions, be about communication, disagreements, and learning, not winning vs losing?

I wonder, if those men and those they were involved with saw things less in terms of winning or losing, how much they'd want to participate in wars and torture in the first place. So much of the world has the "us vs them" mentality. Shouldn't it be "us and hopefully them vs problems and obstacles to good goals"?

Also I wouldn't go around quoteing every little thing someone says saying it's wrong, other's think differently.

That's the beauty of it. I can think, you can think, everyone else in this thread can think. We can read what everyone else says, then we can reply to it. We can criticize ideas, we can agree with ideas, we can build up on previous posts, and share what we know. Why do you think it's such a horrible thing? Disagreement per se isn't something to be avoided. Nor is disagreeing per se a bad thing. No one here is doing "bad" by disagreeing or criticizing. Nor does it make someone "worse" for disagreeing with many people as opposed to disagreeing with one or two. I've criticized what others wrote and others have criticized what I and others wrote, and in my opinion, that's a GOOD thing. I'd be weirded out if everyone shared the same opinion, although I'd be pleasantly surprised if everyone built their opinions on accurate facts.

If you really want to avoid having your posts criticized, the only guarantee for that is to not post.

Quoting is useful because I can quickly and easily show what it is I'm replying to. And, as you've seen, I like to reply a lot.

My opinion on this thread: I haven't seen any facts yet that it truely is better that the troops torture this dog and not get punished for it. Or any facts saying it is OK to train for war by killing innocent dogs.

"Better" and "OK" to/for what?

I think a horrible way to train for war, great way to train to becoming murderers though.

The death of one person is murder, but millions in war are statistics?

but that's cruel as humans live longer than dogs, I am a human, sometimes can be more helpful, are smarter, and much more... all in general though there are other ways like a service dog is more helpful in the community than a vegetable person

I don't think you being human makes either choice less or more cruel. As you said, it depends on the individual, so why not judge based on the individual?

Another thing, stating your opinion and saying your opinion is true and other's are not is wrong. (I think)

So are you doing wrong? =| I'd disagree.

Many times people have the opinion that their opinion is true. They're entitled to their opinions.

you are the one who started the debate

If by "started" you mean "disagreed with something previously posted." Although by that definition, if Person 1 posted that they breed gpigs and they think it's great, and Person 2 disagreed, then it would be Person 2 who "started the debate." I don't buy that.

are the one who PMed me

Huh, isn't that a reason to PM me back, and not a reason to write to me in the thread?

I think also you're the one who keeps criticizing everything everyone else says.

See above, I don't think that's a bad thing. (And I'm assuming you were using hyperbole.) Nor is it a bad thing if you think that me criticizing several other people's posts is reason for you to mainly criticize my posts.

I am stating my opinion in this whole post, freedom of speech. If you don't like it, fine, you don't have to think it's right.

Actually freedom of speech isn't a right here, but I get what you're saying. Sure, people state their opinion, people can like or dislike them, people can think they're right or not. Also people can dislike an opinion and still agree with it.

That's why I think I am morally immature.

What scale of moral maturity do you use?

Anyway, it doesn't have to be sacrifice.

Yeah, I'm thinking more along the lines of breeding.

So once you have them, you are stuck with them.

Remind me to never have any in my possession. If I were very vengeful I'd like to put you up for sale in a mail order catalog to eat garbage -_-