JMS on Usenet

Message

Subject: Re: LOL at JMS' comments on ASM #36
Date: 06 Jan 2002 02:43:38 GMT
From: jmsatb5@aol.com (Jms at B5)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.marvel.universe

>>(And on a different thread...when I said show me one human who could support
>>the random killing of thousands of buffalo, or thousands of humans, just out
>of
>>hatred, I was referring to rational human beings.  Obviously people like Bin
>>Laden or Hitler are separate issues.  They've left the title of humanity
>behind
>>by their actions.  I could've said "show me one sane, rational human being"
>but
>>I'd assumed anyone reading this would consider that implici
>
>Most Taliban are rational. Most of thoase people cheering in the streets
>were ratrional. The men who dropped the bombs on Hiroshima, Nagasaki and
>Dresden were rational. The Monguls were largely rational. 
>

Okay, but again, what does that have to do with what I said above, which
specifically refers to RANDOM killings out of HATRED?   I don't think that all
your examples apply.  Nor, for that matter, was I speaking about any of the
groups you cite: I was referencing only Bin Laden and Hitler.  Again, we must
keep to the specifics of what's at hand.  If you bring in outside examples to
dispute a point, all I can say is "that's not what I was talking about, so it
has nothing to do with the point at hand."

>These are human actions.

They are human, yes, but that does not mean they are rational.  Humans can be
irrational.  You seem to be implying that by virtue of being human, we are all
equally rational.  I don't think that's a supportable position.

 jms

(jmsatb5@aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2001 by synthetic worlds, ltd., 
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine 
and don't send me story ideas)