MORAL QUESTION FOR ALL OF MY ENLIGHTENED BROS

[veritas]

IF YOU HAD TO CHOOSE BETWEEN TRAFFICKING ONE OF THE FOLLOWING WHICH WOULD YOU CHOOSE AND WHY:

1. ENDANGERED SPECIES
2. HUMAN SLAVES
3. NUCLEAR WARHEADS/SUITCASE NUKES.

DEFEND YOUR STANCE.

[PancakeBrah]

Endangered species. It's so obvious. Captain Obvious.

Next question.

[Fig]

Nuclear warheads because MutuallyAssuredDestruction

[Witty]

Yeah endangered species, not that I don't care about them but those other two options endanger my own species.

[ill nik-A]

Human slaves so I can free them, world peace award, Schindler XIV

[Certain]

No one here is enlightened. You know this.

[Vulgar]

And if humans are the endangered species?

[Witty]

No one here is enlightened. You know this.

I am.

Apologize please.

[Witty]

And if humans are the endangered species?

That's probably a positive thing for the earth and most other species.

[Paradox]

No one here is enlightened. You know this.

someone please shut this neckbeard faggot up.

[big baby]

u guys all stoop as fuk

id traffic human salves inside endangered species inside nuclear weapons...lmao u guys all idiyote

"oh i tex tbattla and topcal head between us we so smart!"

sike idiyotes. lmao so simple. like y chicken cross road? idk! cuz wan 2 duh lmao!

[millz]

Well 2 is out of the question because the bible justifies the use of human slaves and since the bible is perfect who am I to argue

So it's gotta be between 1 and 3. I would argue that god created man with the knowledge and ability to create nuclear weapons and since religion is the major cause of pretty much every war ever I would say 3 is ok.

Plus animals only become extinct because god wants them to. So if god wants them dead so do I.



What do I win?

[Fig]

That's probably a positive thing for the earth and most other species.

But your last argument was based on the fact that the other options endangered your species

[Witty]

But your last argument was based on the fact that the other options endangered your species

yeah cuz it's my species.

I said it would be better for other species but I don't want it to happen because I am human.

That would not be a good day for me, but it would be for a lot of other species.

[veritas]

No one here is enlightened. You know this.

He gets the medal. Well done. Rep.

[veritas]

Next question....

would you eat another person to survive?

[oats]

Depends on who I'm trafficking to, what the endanger species is, who the person is, etc.


I would not eat another person tbh. As a younger oatmeal, I would have said fuck yeah gimme some human. But now, unless I was a person of significant social utility, I would not eat another person to survive. The caveat being, if I was in that situation the primal instinct to survive could very well override my principles.

[TYSON]

Trafficking in it own right is not something I would do at all no matter what it is. Would I eat another person to survive? No

[Zen]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jH18BshZDPw

[sral]

Human slaves so I can free them, world peace award, Schindler XIV

LMAO CONFIRMED WHITEKNIGHTING FAGGOT CONFIRMED

[Diode]

i would like to set your testicles on fire and then put them out with blood hemorrhaging from your freshly disemboweled small intestine.

i would then cook them in a bowl baked from the flesh of your colon and rectum.

no anesthesia.

[sral]

LMAO YO ANASTHESIA THAT CANADIAN BITCH WITH THEM BIG OLETITTIES?

http://trialx.com/curetalk/wp-content/blogs.dir/7/files/2011/03/gcelebrities/Anastacia-1.jpg

I'D FUCK THOSE MELANOMA COVERED CANCER RIDDEN BITCHES WITHOUT A SECONDS THOUGHT OFF GP