#168 What a Dilemma

#168 What a Dilemma

2010 so far = pretty fun. Caught up with some old friends over the weekend and saw two movies, Avatar and Sherlock Holmes. I went into both with rather low expectations, but ended up enjoying them. Yes, Avatar was predictable and unoriginal and full of poorly written dialog, but for me the visuals more than made up for it.

How has your 2010 been so far?


Discussion (14)¬

  1. Dylan says:

    Survival of the fittest! Kill the baby, take the candy! It’s the laws of nature, dammit!
    Hell, I feel like steak tonight, I’ll take the baby, too.

  2. It works on so many levels!
    You see an old lady crossing the street, but you don’t want to slow down. There are no witnesses. Should you run her over?

  3. Canuovea says:

    Dylan: While this is true to an extent it is also then the law of nature that angry parents can come after you and tear your spleen out and force you to eat it… then maybe kill you… Or just let you bleed out and suffer over an extended period of time before dying.

    So folks, you see someone who you want to go after and tear the spleen out of then force he/she to eat it, and then perhaps kill them quickly or ensure a long drawn out death full of suffering agony. Do you do it?

    No? What if said person just killed your baby (maybe ate it too) to steal some candy? I’d consider it.

    Back to the baby question… No? What if the baby is the anti-Christ? What if the baby MIGHT be the anti-Christ?

  4. Emil says:

    What’s the difference between a baby and a sandwich?

    You don’t fuck the sandwich before you eat it.

  5. chaospet says:

    I’m not surprised to see my dear readers defending the act of killing a baby for candy. But Emil, my friend, you took things to a level of depravity I did not anticipate. Bravo!

  6. Liosis says:

    Started Metaethics today. The teacher posed a similar dilemma and either everyone was afraid to answer for fear of getting it wrong, or because it was half past eight and they weren’t awake yet. But seriously, it’s so easy…it must be a trap!

  7. Canuovea says:

    Emil… So those twisted baby jokes strike again… like, (ahem): Whats the difference between a Ferrari and a pile of dead babies? I don’t have a Ferrari in my garage… I’ve heard worse. Much worse…

    But then again having never eaten a baby before I don’t know the general procedure… And to be honest there could be a handful of people who would answer Emil back: “Er… yes we do.” I bet you would never trade lunches with those people again…

    And I am only defending killing the baby and taking it’s candy if it were the anti-Christ… and even then (given that I actually accepted the anti-Christ bit) I would only kill it if I couldn’t get a position in the new administration… (Err, oops don’t read that…).

  8. chaospet says:

    Liosis, that is hilarious and also a little sad. I may have to try that with future classes to see if they react in the same way.

  9. EveryZig says:

    So do Christ and the Anti-Christ annihilate on contact? (for that matter popes and anti-popes?)

  10. Canuovea says:

    EveryZig… No, they don’t annihilate on contact, rather they form a synthesis from the thesis and antithesis becoming something altogether new…

    Oh and don’t ask how I know… Please.

  11. Abeo says:

    You guys are approaching the question all wrong. It depends on what kind of candy it is. Lollipop? Maybe. Taffy? No. Sour worms? Definitely.

    I mean, sure the question assumes that it is candy you would like to eat but it doesn’t clarify if it is a casual like or a love that pulses so strongly you would conquer nations and devour their children to get it.

  12. chaospet says:

    Taffy isn’t worth killing a baby for? Adam West disagrees.

  13. Abeo says:

    Hmmm… dare I disagree with Batman? I better not take the risk. It’s settled, I kill the next baby I see with taffy, it’s what Batman would want.

  14. simo says:

    je suis un étudion en la faculté en sience homme et litter je vodre voire tout les libre philosophie