Girl Throws Puppies into River

Humor*

Humour*

Humour*

troll

No human life is worth more than any animal. I could never kill a puppy that didn't need it, I could easily toss a bunch of adults in a river. With plenty of justification at that.

1. funniercomparative of fun·ny (Adjective) 1. Causing laughter or amusement; humorous. 2. Expressing a speaker's objection to another's laughter or mockery: "She started to laugh. “What's so funny?” he asked". More » Merriam-Webster - The Free Dictionary Just stop talking.

I wasn't talking about the word funnier, itself, but more the fact he was implying that the other person is funnier than I, which is a rediculous claim. Nobody is more silly than I, as I have been voted best comedian twice in middle school.

No human life is worth more than any animal. I could never kill a puppy that didn't need it, I could easily toss a bunch of adults in a river. With plenty of justification at that.

I can agree with this, as long as there is justification.

So, murder > murder? What if there was justification for killing a puppy? Your justification for a human would be that this person is a nuisance to society. He has killed before, and will kill again. Could you use that justification to kill a puppy? What if a young pitbull was playing to rough with a child that wasn't being supervised? He has tasted blood, and has killed before and will kill again. Therfore, we should kill the puppy.

Your both r'tard's.

I didn't notice that actually, had I noticed both words were spelled wrong I would of caught the satire. /facepalm

So, murder > murder? What if there was justification for killing a puppy? Your justification for a human would be that this person is a nuisance to society. He has killed before, and will kill again. Could you use that justification to kill a puppy? What if a young pitbull was playing to rough with a child that wasn't being supervised? He has tasted blood, and has killed before and will kill again. Therfore, we should kill the puppy. Your both r'tard's.

The point he was portraying was that of innocence vs an adult human (more than likely immoral/detrimental towards society). I say I could agree with that stance as long as there is justification, and that makes me a retard?

Riiiiiiiight.

That isn't what makes you a retard, no.

Innocense Vs Adult.

Knowing no one is born innocent, and everyone is born through sin. Animal's may as well be born with the same burden. We should cleanse the world and kill everybody. It makes perfect sense, because it is justified.

You're wrong.

I don't think animals can have sin, since they didn't eat the fruit of knowledge, and are all pre-programed with instincts. Just to clarify with my belief...

Anyways, I have to agree with D3V(and K_A's, lol)'s last post. At the same time, everyone should have the choice to make up for what they've done - as they might truely regret it. Remember that bald guy who was getting death penalty? I dunno, he just suddenly came to mind.

So, murder > murder? What if there was justification for killing a puppy? Your justification for a human would be that this person is a nuisance to society. He has killed before, and will kill again. Could you use that justification to kill a puppy? What if a young pitbull was playing to rough with a child that wasn't being supervised? He has tasted blood, and has killed before and will kill again. Therfore, we should kill the puppy. Your both r'tard's.

Justification for killing a puppy? What could there possibly be? Besides putting it out of it's own misery, because due to humans, it was born horribly disfigured.
Pit bull's are just like any other dog. The aggressiveness is due to the owners. Secondly why would you leave an unsupervised child around an aggressive pit bull. Sounds like the herd needs to be culled anyways.
Are you ready for the river Kazilla? It will only be cold for a minute.

Animals do not "sin". They are following the evolutionary path that got us as far as we have come, but have been straying from for so long.

why would you leave an unsupervised child around an aggressive pit bull. Sounds like the herd needs to be culled anyways.

"Oh no! My dog ate food!? Who would have guessed!?"
lol

Moron's leave their child with their pets unsurpervised all the time. "My dog would never hurt a fly". Until that one day you come home to a bloody fucking mess.

I don't think animals can have sin, since they didn't eat the fruit of knowledge, and are all pre-programed with instincts. Just to clarify with my belief... Animals do not "sin". They are following the evolutionary path that got us as far as we have come, but have been straying from for so long.

Idk about you, but I don't remember eating any forbidden fruit. I've just been following the evolutionary path that has come before me.

Idk about you, but I don't remember eating any forbidden fruit. I've just been following the evolutionary path that has come before me.

Idk about you, but I don't ever remember being a monkey and suddenly evolving.
(Nice try, but same concept)

You kinda proved my point there sparky.

Not sure how. As far as I know
Evolution: evolving into humans happened a long time ago.
Fruit of eden: eating the fruit happened a long time ago.

No matter which is right, neither of us was there, but we still have the sid-- ohhhhhhh~

Innocense Vs Adult. Knowing no one is born innocent, and everyone is born through sin. Animal's may as well be born with the same burden. We should cleanse the world and kill everybody. It makes perfect sense, because it is justified.

You're joking, right? I would call you out for how stupid you are, but boviously it isn't needed.

Moron's leave their child with their pets unsurpervised all the time. "My dog would never hurt a fly". Until that one day you come home to a bloody fucking mess.

Hence the reason they should left to their own devices. Let them and their children die. That much less bad gene's floating around our world.

Idk about you, but I don't remember eating any forbidden fruit.

The tree of knowledge is a metaphor. The forbidden fruit was meant for the "gods" so that they may have the knowledge to decided what animals live and die on a day to day basis. When "Adam"(Man) ate from the tree he got the wrong idea and figured since he possessed the knowledge that the gods have he can and shall decided what is right/wrong good/evil life/death.

Animals follow the laws of nature. They do no deviate, therefore they cannot be good and evil. It's kind of like the laws of gravity and aeronautics. They are just that, laws.

I've just been following the evolutionary path that has come before me.

Does that make what you are doing right? Your culture and everyone around you is killing the very LAND BASE you live on. So just keep on following.