Not everyone who fights, hurts, maims, kills, and destroys does so because they love to do it. Most people do it because they're angry and they lack self-control. Tell me, when you're angry, do you ever scream? And when you're angry and you scream, does it feel good? Because it doesn't for me. It feels terrible and it makes me afraid of myself. But I have to do it, because I'm just that angry. There are those who love to kill, who study it and perfect it, just so they can be in charge. But for most people, destruction of life isn't a special talent. It's not an ability. It's a response. A reaction. A cry of pure agony given physical form. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying I disagree with your proposal. I'm not sure yet whether I agree with it or not. But regardless, I disagree with your reasoning.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

You already disagree with it by your vote and all throughout your comments.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

I propose we eliminate prisons and stop pretending we have the right to judge each other. We we stop judging, then we will stop fight wars.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

So elimination of prisons cures and solves everything? The bad guys just disappear and ride off in to the sunset? More of your rose colored glasses postulates.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

This from someone who's "god" specifically told him not to judge and to turn the other cheek. And yes. If no one judged anyone else then wars would end, as would all crimes. As this possible? Probably not. But if I did not judge "what you have" as better or worse than "what I have" then why would I want to take your stuff, or kill you, or covet your wife, or tax you, or rape you or change your mind about anything? I would just leave you alone.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

Ah, but you can not quote a God who does not exist. His words are completely irrelevant to someone denying He is there. His Book also is meaningless, because it is HIS Word, and not that of one who does not believe it. I would much rather you start quoting Mickey Mouse or Bugs Bunny in the future. At least that would be consistent with your lack of belief and/or denial of my God's existence.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

I'm sorry that you are offended by the teachings of the //man// I admire and aspire to emulate. I understand that you believe him to be a god but that doesn't stop me from trying to live my life as he instructed. Forgiveness and love is all I desire.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

Me offended??? I had you re-read the book of John to prove to yourself that Jesus Christ was sent to earth by His Father - God. You deny that and the 4 Gospels. If you deny the 4 Gospels, then you can hardly emulate the words of anyone, because you just destroyed His Word and what He says. You also say you have no interest in going to heaven, and yet that is exactly where Jesus came from and returned to. He promised to "prepare a place" for all those who believe in and follow Him. Eternal life is the reward of those who believe what He said. You can't pick and choose which of His sayings you will or do believe. We either believe everything He said and taught (especially those about His Father God), or we don't believe any of it. You consistently say that I take verses out of context while you deny the entire context. In the beginning GOD created....Genesis 1:1 In the beginning was the WORD....and the WORD was God John 1:1 The same was in the beginning WITH GOD John 1:2 Who was the WORD? John 1:14, And the WORD was made flesh, and dwelt among us.... John the Baptist was sent "from God." John 1:6 "become the sons of God" John 1:12 John 1:18 - No man hath seen God at any time... John 1:29 - "Behold the Lamb of God" John 1:34 - John the Baptist gave witness and clearly testified that Jesus Christ "is the Son of God." John 1:49 - Nathaniel called Jesus "Rabbi," "Son of God," and "King of Israel." John 3:2 - Nicodemus calls Jesus "Rabbi," and says he knows Jesus is a teacher "come from God." John 3:12 - Jesus said if I tell you of earthly things and you won't believe, how will you believe of heavenly things? John 3:16 - "For GOD so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:31 - John the Baptist is speaking and says clearly that Jesus came from above, is above all, and came from heaven. John 3:33 - receiving the testimony of Christ confirms that "God is true." John 3:34 - "he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God:" John 4:24 - Jesus said that "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." John 5:18 - Why did the Jews want to kill Jesus? Because He said "God was his Father, making himself equal with God." I could go on and on and on................but Jesus plainly told the Jews, Pharisees and scribes that the reason they were not right and could not believe was because they did NOT accept that He was sent from His Father God. That message is so vividly clear at least through the first 17 chapters of the book. They did not believe His miracles were from His Father either, but NOBODY can deny what Jesus said and taught as a fundamental teaching: He was sent here by His Father, He spoke the words of His Father, His Father was God. You choose not to believe in God, therefore, you can not believe or follow the words of Jesus Christ. It is that unbelief and denial that put Jesus on the Cross. I am truly sorry you refuse to get or see it the way it is. But I have not taken anything out of context. Your lack of faith is what is out of context.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

I pick and choose, yes, and freely admit it. I chose love they neighbor I choose judge not I choose charity I choose to turn the other cheek I choose render unto Caesar I choose peace I cannot tell what **you** choose, but by your posts I would guess it is "none of the above". Hope I am wrong. I read other books and pick and choose from them as well, including Plato Kierkegaard Russell Smith Swift Rand Derrida Burke and a host of others Just because something is written doesn't mean I have to believe every word of it.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

As always....your choice. We live and die by them, so be prepared.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

That's one of the worst arguments against an atheist quoting the bible that I've ever seen...

by Anonymous 10 years ago

Dude, is this really how you think, or are you just playig internet flame war?

by Anonymous 9 years ago

I don't feel anything. I am just asking.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

I dunno what if they go all wild on innocent civilians?

by Anonymous 10 years ago

That's just stupid. Most of the people in their probably don't want to fight, kill, etc. Plus, they could just escape.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

Criminals are more aggressive.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

Because that's reckless and just plain fucking stupid.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

If they ended up in prisom im not too sure theyd want to fight for the country.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

Do we have to make it a choice on their part? I was more in favor of insisting that they do it to pay for their crimes. Once they are incarcerated, we, the taxpayers, have to pay for them to sit and rot in jail cells for how ever many years. It is a waste of humanity and money. The jails and prisons are way too overcrowded anyway, so something has to be done. Any of you have a more creative suggestion, or would you all just rather throw stones at my idea?

by Anonymous 10 years ago

This sounds ideal to me. But society would refute sending people to their deaths at war. Pretty lame that people are so damn sensitive. Too many people feel morally obligated to spare their neighbor even when their neighbor has shown that they are unwilling to be a benefit towards society and moreover a leech on society.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

How would society refute it? We already send our "finest" - and it is considered an honor and duty. We know full well that many of those young men we send will never return or will come back totally damaged. My thought was that many in prisons are either connected to gangs or were street thugs who love to fight, maim, kill, and hurt people. They do it for "fun" and "thrills." I think we should let them earn their keep, and serve out their sentences doing something constructive, rather than rotting away in a jail cell.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Maybe if we allowed them an option. I don't think anything like a draft would fly though.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

That solves like 20 problems all at once, as long as only violent offenders are shipped out. Brilliant!

by Anonymous 9 years ago

I completely disagree because they do not have the same loyalty to their country as those who volunteer to fight. They could easily turn on their own squad members. The best method to punish those who are in jail because of weaponry is NOT to give them military-grade weapons.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Don't you think they just MIGHT gain a little respect if forced to be on the front lines and knowing their life is on the line every single day? They already love to fight and hurt people, and many of them are apparently fairly good at it. They may not be loyal to the country, but they still have the instinct to survive - kill or be killed. And most of them DO have military grade or style weapons when they are out on the streets - so they would not be being introduced to anything new or unusual.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fuo.pdf most of them do not have military grade weapons so maybe a little research is in order before making broad statements

by Anonymous 9 years ago

This is laughable BECAUSE law enforcement does not get all or most of the weapons being used by gang members and drug lords. Ever hear of the Fast & Furious scandal? Educate thyself woman before trying to take me to task. Our country is selling and providing military grade weapons to the enemy on a regular basis. Guess you missed that one............Oops!

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Do not call me woman. In this instance you are using it derogative manner which I will not stand for. Do not. Call me woman.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

I just did and you are a woman. I sure as hell won't call you a man, I won't call you a girl, I won't call you a lady (I don't know you), I won't call you a Miss or Ms since I don't know you - so yes, woman works very well since I see your picture and your name. You don't get to dictate the terms of my speech. Sorry, you really have been manipulated and bought in to the politically correct propaganda.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Oh it's propaganda? I didn't realize my right to be called whatever the heck I want to was propaganda and not just my basic rights.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

You have a right to NOT be called a woman? Where is that one written?

by Anonymous 9 years ago

I just happen to have that tattooed on my buttocks! Small world...

by Anonymous 9 years ago

by Anonymous 9 years ago

dude, that's like calling your soldiers cowards and incompetent

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Not at all. It is like expecting the scum who sit and rot in our jail cells to own up to something and pay something back. I know what our soldiers can do. Why send innocent soldiers to die at the hands of assholes who love to bomb, blow up, and chop heads off? Our guys are not allowed to fight back properly in many situations because of the "rules of engagement" (a big joke). Terrorists could care less about following rules of engagement, agreements, peace talks, or diplomacy. They love to kill. Many in our prison system love to kill. Let them all have their wish and get busy killing!

by Anonymous 9 years ago

the rules of engagement aims to minimize civilian casualties. granted that many civilians die anyway, still there is an effort, and this makes the soldiers' sacrifice honorable. but hey, sending criminals to fight criminals is like treating chaos with chaos. it doesn't work

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Whatever you say. I have my opinions and disagree with yours.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

The guys I used to drink with could be real jerks sometimes. 1 beer tuns into tequila shots all night, than Bam I wake up with "You have a right to NOT be called a woman" on my **** and an all day hangover. And a penis drawn on my face. Like I said, bunch of jerks.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Why would they fight for those that incarcerated them?

by Anonymous 9 years ago

I did not say to have it be voluntary - I meant for it to be mandatory as part of their punishment and forcing them to give something back for all that they have taken from others.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

You can force them out there, but that doesn't mean they will fight. If given the weapons, they may fight back against those who gave the weapons, or would rather use the weapons on themselves instead.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

If bullets are coming at them, trust me, the ruthless nature in them would quickly spring in to action, and they would defend themselves and seek to kill and destroy those shooting at them. They could easily be dropped off without the ability to retaliate against those who gave them the weapons. And if they chose to use the weapons on themselves, then they just decided their own foolish fate. They are alive and in our prison systems because they are the perpetrators and survivors - NOT the victims!

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Your generalizations are astonishing.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

One out of every 100 Americans is in jail right now. That is **5** times higher than China, //**China**//!! The privatisation of the prison industry in the US (making it a "for profit" industry) , the "war" on drugs, "mandatory" sentencing (which apparently does not apply to rich people), and the discriminatory incarceration of blacks and hispanics has made the US the most jackbooted nation on Earth. I bow my head in shame when I think about what the conservative right has done to this country.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

And I bow in shame to think that someone who believes in nothing has so much to say and is so opinionated over and about nothing! Nothing can be known according to you, so nothing could possibly fail or be inferior to any thoughts or ideas you hold dear. You could not possibly be "shamed" by anything that anyone does or thinks because ultimately none of it can be known by you. Why do you keep passing judgment and making criticisms of things that don't matter? You are just one giant accident on a chaotic random planet, so just chill out and stop buying in to all the labels that your liberal bias and media is feeding you. There is no such thing as a "conservative right" - and there is not even a country.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

So sad that you continue to cling to your notions of right and wrong and continue to judge me. Your god told you not to judge me, and yet you do. How I hang my head is of no concern to you. I did not say the right was "good" or "bad" - or even that it //existed// - I simply said I bow my head when I think about it. Am I not allowed to think now? Just because I do believe something exists doesn't mean I can't think about it and react to it. Do you think that Dr. Seuss believed in the "Cat and the Hat"? He still thought about the cat and had opinions about the cat, even though the cat doesn't exist.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

I only repeat and reflect back to you what you have shared with me about yourself. You have judged yourself. You know absolutely nothing of my God because He does not exist to you. Nothing you say about Him or His Book is relative or even worthy of consideration. When you have a world view that says nothing can be known, then thinking is pointless and worthless. Your thoughts could not possibly be known and have no foundation of any kind to stand on. They are random acts of empty drivel. You say life is meaningless and without purpose, so please express consistently the logical end and conclusions of this world view. You have said repeatedly that nothing can be known or believed - so that obviously includes anything you could possibly ever think about or write. There is nothing you can say or any idea you can project that holds weight or merit. I am not the one who chose your world view for you - you did that all by yourself.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Correct. So stop responding to them. They are meaningless to you. You cannot understand them. So stop judging them.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

I do understand........they are meaningless to me AND to you. I don't "judge" them - I just consider them pointless attempts at filling empty space.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Interesting. So calling something "pointless" is not judging it? OK. Well in that case, alrighty!

by Anonymous 9 years ago

No, it is not. It is expressing the outcome of the ideology you hold to. No truth, no right or wrong, nothing can be known. How could saying "pointless" be judgmental? Words don't even have meaning in your world view because they are not rooted in anything of solidity. If there are no absolutes, then degrees of anything (words included) don't exist. You can not arbitrarily say that one thing is "good" or "better" over another. It is not possible. So you have no basis to argue, debate, or even declare there is such a thing as logic. Says who? You? At this point and time? Because you feel or believe it to be so for the moment? And how could I begin to judge a person who does not believe in judgment? Such fallacy and insignificance.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Correct. So glad you have come around to my point of view.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Never. Only letting you know I can cite your view back to you. I would never ever endorse such nonsense. I support your right and freedom to not believe anything of your choosing. But it is clearly something that has so little to offer people who hunger for intellectual stimulation and substance.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Likewise I can cite your view back at you, but as you asked me not to, because you find it insulting, I have stopped. I am sorry you have missed the substance in the lack of substance argument. Oh well. I shall keep trying to get you to understand the beauty of "being and nothingness", a concept originally put forth by a very religious man by the way.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

What a profound reply..........

by Anonymous 9 years ago

The multitude of periods sure do make that sentence more intellectual. Regardless of petty comments, you can believe that every criminal is some hardened person (probably male in your mind) willing to murder ruthlessly, but keep in mind some people are in prison for petty things like illegal downloads of videos, or making pot brownies. They may not want to murder. If you think they all deserve to be thrust into the scene of warfare, without any regard to the psychological consequences, well, I guess that's your opinion.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

So because "some" are in prison for "petty" things you are willing to then generalize and support sympathy for all? Great line of thinking. Female thing I suppose. And yes, my opinion exactly.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Nowhere did I say sympathy for all, I was outing your generalizations. It's funny how you manage to twist my words the way you do. Regardless of my thinking being a "female thing" (nice attempt at sexism though) I have a feeling that in order for society to not crumble even more around us than it already is, there needs to be more sympathy for those who are imprisoned for ridiculous means, rather than just saying a grand "okie-dokie" to sending all out to murder under the pretense that every last prisoner is a brutal killing machine with no regard to human life. I am now getting the feeling that you are playing your cards to troll me, and I am the naive person who keeps responding to your text because I am bored out of my mind.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Sorry my OP was just too out of the box for your way of thinking. Troll you? What an ignorant thing to say. I give you complete permission to stop boring yourself with my lazy uncompelling comments. It would be the best thing you could do for both of us (sexism intended).

by Anonymous 9 years ago

would you rather send hundreds of sheep or a handful of lions? you have a point that if war takes many lives, then we should send those who are willing to kill or die, but i believe that they will never achieve anything since they don't follow orders crucial to the mission's success. worse, they might turn cloaks. also imagine the reputation of your country for sending immoral warmongers for your country's cause. The brave ones our countries send to fight our wars represent the people they are fighting for.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Could not possibly be worse or equal than sending brave young men out to die for no cause at all............. Our men are fighting wars that are not real wars at all - so their sacrifice is superficial and only done for the war games that false "leaders" like our current "commander" want to play. Let the convicts die and pay the price for their country. If they had the balls to make it look bad, then they can pay the price for their behavior with their ultimate sacrifice - their lives!

by Anonymous 9 years ago

the cause may not be real for you or us, but it is real for them. wars are ever present and inevitable. these men are free men, they choose to live and die this way. and some may argue that they are blinded by false promises and ideals, but who can say what's real and what's not. this also applies to other vocation such as priesthood. also i would like to quote gandalf "Do not be so eager to deal out death and judgement, even the wisest cannot see all ends."

by Anonymous 9 years ago

I never said anything about cause or choice. I know why our men are in uniform. I only pointed out that men who are not in uniform are still men and should pay back for all they have taken from others. They have drained society and still cost us to sit in a cell and take up space. Instead of sacrificing our best guys, we should sacrifice and clean out some of the convicted and put them to use. War requires bodies and death. Let the convicts die for their country. They live in and have enjoyed the same benefits soldiers have/do.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

i agree that they should pay a high price, but nothing is higher than human life, not even the law. i'd feel so sad for those wrongfully accused and condemned.

by Anonymous 9 years ago