Are soldiers murderers?

No Gerry, because in Exodus, ( Exodus 21:23-27 ) in which a person who
has taken the eye of another in a fight is instructed to give his own eye in
compensation

In the famous legal code written by Hammurabi, the principle of exact
reciprocity is very clearly used. For example, if a person caused the death
of another person's child, the killer's own child would be put to death
(Hammurabi's code, ¶230).

 

But they are not instructions, are they. If people are going to
cohabit in large or even small groups, these rules are essential to
allowing that cohabiattion to occur. And yes, they are binding if you
wish to live within pretty much any society. Religions shanghaid these
rules and claim them as their own.

Do you think that when Moses came down from the mountain and said
"Thou shalt not kill or **** you neighbours wife" the people said
"Wow, that's new. We never thought of that. We'll have to stop doing
those every day things now". Or that is was something they already
knew were societal rules? They didn't apply those rules to people not
off their community however, their God ordered them to kill others
willy-nilly. Except the virgins, Gosd specifically told them they
could keep the virgins.

Theo

 

No you're a killer who beat the system, still evil, still escaping the
law but *not* a murderer. It's simply that you're misusing the term.

We mean the same thing but you're using the wrong term for it.

G-S

 

The most accepted definition is something along the lines of "One must
not 'unlawfully kill'", which is significantly different to "Though
Shalt not Kill".


G-S

 

A murderer is a person who kills with malice or intent

A killer is a person who kills but not necessarily with malice or intent

 

Previously you said only a court can decide if someone is a murderer,
now you're saying there's no need for a court to decide. *shrug*

Nev..
'07 XB12X
'08 DL1000K8

 

No, you don't.

Nev..
'07 XB12X
'08 DL1000K8

 

*edited for correctness*

 

"> OK... I would say that if the "war" or "action" in which the

Kiling there was not murder because there has not been a trial and there has
not been guilty verdict to this day. That situation may change if we at
some point in the future have a trial and a guilty verdict.
It's not all that hard

Capt. A. L.

 

"> Previously you said only a court can decide if someone is a murderer,

You don't need a court to decide that a person is not a murderer, If a
person is charged then you do, if they're not charged then you don't.
However only a court, as you quoted correctly, can decide that someone IS a
murderer.

Capt. A. L.

 

">>

Then please tell us Nev if not the court who decides that the killing was or
was not unlawful? Please use my abused housewife seniaro- in one instance
she is charged but aquitted. But if she were to dispose of the body and
was never charged who decides if the killing was unlawful?

Capt A. L.

 

Sorry about that
Didn't know you were such a pedant Geoff

 

Just providing examples in popular culture Nev.
(Note I said "they" not "he". Ignoring the whole 3-is-one Holy Trinity
malarky I was referrring to the people who push the "commandments" rather
than their alleged author)

 

In your warped world maybe. Not in mine.

=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

I'll stick to my point of view. I quite like it.

Thanks for the chat, but I am utterly unconvinced by your legalistic
rhetoric.

=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

Hang about... Earlier (see above) you said " they are still trying to
agree on the correct translations."

You're all over the shop in your mad attempt to pretend to know what
you're talking about.

As I said... Full of shit... I'm done with this thread. Seeya in
another one where hopefully you manage to make some sense.


=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

As you wish...

And a more genral usage of the term merely means "you're off topic
dude". and you are.

And now you're nit picking. Go play with Wyzl.

You've changed your question. Read your original question. think
about what i said and what you asked, and if your synapses are firing
well, you should be able to figure out how your question is irrelevant
to what I said. Go play with Wyzl. He's a lot like you. You'll get
on famously.

I think you're catching on...

I think you and mean different thing by the word 'superceding'. Mine
is the plain english meaning.

I said what I said. I have no wish to discuss it with you.

=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

Sarsparilla and a Milky Bar, thanks... ;-)

=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

That stuff tastes like the back of stamps urrrk

 

That's why I like it so much. Reminds me of the old days when you
could lick the Queen's arse after every time you wrote a letter.
Texting diminishes the experience somewhat.

=================

Onya bike

Gerry